Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Caterane 11-18-06, 01:05 PM	THE ORACLE OF GLADIUS http://www.caterane.de/CoCo/Struktur/Oracle.jpg I am the Oracle of Gladius. If you seek advice or the answer to a question about the fabric of our world and its physical and metaphysical laws, you have come to the right place. State your question here and I will speak through one of my speakers, also known as the Elders. Whatever the Elders say will be or become reality. It sometimes happens that the Elders are not of the same opinion in that they have interpreted my will correctly. In that case, they will consult and agree by vote on a final decision. If that failed or if their decision is not to your satisfaction, it is possible to call upon my avatar, referred to as Game Master. In the next rooms, you will find a list with answers given to previously asked questions so you should first see if your petition hasn't already been adressed in the past. Below, you will find the rules and guidelines on how to ask and receive answers here. Please follow these guidelines. Rules and Guidelines For the most part, this is going to be a rather free-form thread. There are a few simple things that I ask to ensure that this runs as smoothly and efficiently as possible. If the question is currently being discussed, please name the thread that the debate/discussion is taking place. When referencing a currently ongoing debate, please link to the original location of the debate. Please list the names of the parties involved and a summary of sides taken, using quotes as appropriate. If another Elder has weighed in on the topic, please let everyone know. Always try to be polite and courteous!! Occasionally edit your initial post, to add new info and cover all the bases. Please do not hold an active debate in this thread. This is the successor of the Ask an Elder thread. You can ask any question about the D&D and/or Core Coliseum rules. One or more of the Elders will step forward and answer your question. Their decision will become law unless overruled by the Game Master.
Scribelords 11-18-06, 04:08 PM	Reserved
Scribelords 11-18-06, 04:09 PM	Reserved 2
Scribelords 11-18-06, 04:10 PM	When you find a disagreement between two D&D rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees. A monster’s statistics block supersedes the descriptive text. Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player’s Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for PC races, and the base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master’s Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player’s Handbook, you should assume the Player’s Handbook is the primary source. The Dungeon Master’s Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities. What does the immunity to sleep ability that elves have apply to exactly? Poison (Ex): An opponent hit by a drow’s poisoned weapon must succeed on a DC 13 Fortitude save or fall unconscious. After 1 minute, the subject must succeed on another DC 13 Fortitude save or remain unconscious for 2d4 hours. A typical drow carries 1d4–1 doses of drow knockout poison. Drow typically coat arrows and crossbow bolts with this poison, but it can also be applied to a melee weapon. Note that drow have no special ability to apply poison without risking being poisoned themselves. Since this poison is not a magical effect, drow and other elves are susceptible to it. This implies that all non magical sleep effects work on elves. Can a gladiator with levels in both a casting and a manifesting class hold the charge for a touch spell and still be free to manifest psionic powers? (or vice versa with a touch psionic power?) Holding the Charge If you don’t discharge the spell in the round when you cast ... If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Since the CoCo is treating Magic and Psionics as equal, then any attempt to cast a spell or manifest a power would cause the initial charge to dissapate. This only partially answered the question. What about manifesting a power that is not going to be held when holding a spell charge (or vice versa)? Can you, for instance, hold the charge of a spell and then manifest force screen? Or hold a charge of a power and then cast mage armor? Can invisible gladiators read scrolls? Illusion Illusion spells deceive the senses or minds of others. They cause people to see things that are not there, not see things that are there, hear phantom noises, or remember things that never happened. Holw long does a pin last? You can hold your opponent immobile for 1 round by winning an opposed grapple check (made in place of an attack). Once you have an opponent pinned, you have a few options available to youPinning an opponent is good if you have multiple actions in a round as well as when you have additional combatants who can then easily strike the pinned subject. House Hide Rules: You can hide if you are within ranks = feet of any place that gives you cover or concealment, how it the distance calculated? The ACTUAL distance is what matters. The issue with terrain is establishing that it may impede movement, however since your ability to hide is not based on speed or distance moved during a round, this is of little importance. One could run around a column, and as long as they stay within the 10 feet of the column, as allowed by their hide rank of 10, then they can attempt to hide. If a character chose an animal template for Lycanthropy that had wings, would the character gain wings (and equivalent flight speed) when in Hybrid form?Speed: Same as the base creature or base animal, depending on which form the lycanthrope is using. Hybrids use the base creature’s speed (including alternate speed types). Are PP gained from the Body Fuel feat subject to the 1/3 rule? (relevant to this fight, where the feat was used in combination with characters available PP reserve to summon five astral constructs at 3 PP a pop, which strikes me as a touch overpowered for ECL 3.) If I hit my enemy with a weapon with the dislocator or greater dislocator weapon enchantments, will he lose the match because of the 10 round rule? This question may have to have some more discussion. My feeling is that 18,000 is a bit cheap for the power of the weapon. True Strike + 18,000gp and you can win many fights. From what I understand, the current ruling on scrolls is that they cannot be used with the Share Spells and Deliver Touch Spells ability of a familiar because they are "activations" not "castings" of said spells. However, the SRD states "A spell successfully activated from a scroll works exactly like a spell prepared and cast the normal way." So why does this not extend to allowing it to be shared or allowing your familiar to touch with it for you? I would really appreciate an explanation on this one? The current rule comes from a "Rules of the game: familiars" article that says you cannot share spells that come from magic items; any magic item. As we know, nondection works against see invisible. Does the psionic power escape dectection work against see invisible too? Escape Detection and Nondetection are both listed as being effective against Clair[add extension here] and other divinations, and if the ruling has been made that nondetection works against see invisible, then escape detection would as well. What equipment slots are available on a psycrystal? And what about other non bipeds? Horses? Krenshar? Dragons? Since Psionics and Magic are so very transparent, is it possable to craft/aquire psionic versions of various items that modify magical prowess. For example can a character buy a psionic version of the Orange Ioun Stone that grants a +1ML. Or could a character buy/craft rods of metapsionics? Or is it possible to make a psionic version of a ring of wizardry? If so would these items cost credits? Psionic versions of items could be created since there is a model to do so, but since they are not a normal magic item listed in the Core books, it would cost credits to produce them. how lenient should a pitlord be with "meaningful interaction" concerning the 10-round rule? If one character is getting shot at roughly once every nine rounds or so, but does not react except to move away, is that still meaningful interaction? We really need at least semi-concrete delay rules. They cause too many problems being as vague as they are. The 10-round rule is in place to prevent campers. People who sit still, undetectable, to outlast any buffs so they can buff and win. It keeps everything fair. Perhaps we need a more in-depth look at the 10-round rule. Meaningful interaction is really up to the discretion of the player running the fight. As a general rule, running away in fear and avoiding a player just long enough to expire their ability/power/effect is not very meaningful. Sneaking about and getting in the occassional shot can be considered meaningful. I see it like this: If the player is actively seeking combat, even if they are very cautious about it, then they are performing meaningful interaction. If they are not seeking combat, then there is no meaningful interaction. If a player is intentionally attacking 1/10 rounds, then I think we can safely say that they are trying to abuse the rules and bypass any real interaction. Slap them with the penalty. when doubling the price of a weapon to make it cold-iron, how much do you double? Base price, Masterwork price, Size modifiers, other? Let's use the example of a [Ma]Large Cold Iron Greatsword. A greatsword costs 50gp. Large size it doubles to 100gp. Cold Iron makes it 200(doubling the actual weapon cost). Then you add masterwork, enchantments, etc... How does the CoCo handle the Anti-Magic Field (AMF)? This effect can get realy confusing with regard to reach weapons and ranged attacks and area efects. Here are a few examples: If a large sized creature is the target of an antimagic field, then it can wield a glaive and its reach is long enough to extend beyond the AMF area. Will a magical glaive wielded by the creature have normal effect on those it hits, and can the monster claim the enhancement bonus on attacks made with the weapon? Also AMF is an emination, so does it have a radius of 10' from the edge of the creature or 10' from the center of the creature? How do ranged attacks with magical weapons resolve against an opponent within an AMF or from an AMF? Do attacks from magical bows still enjoy there enhancement bonus or other special effects when targeted into an AMF? What about the powers of magical arrows? How about if a magical arrow is fired from inside an AMF? A ghosts corrupting gaze? Is it always on, or can it just be used by gaze attacks. If someone uses turn undead on a ghost PC, does the ghost automatically lose, because it runs away for 10 rounds (leaving the arena etherealy), which leaves it no time to come back. Usually in that case the answer would be yes. The ghost would travel so far out ofthe arena there is no chance for return. Can you prebuff with the disolving weapon/touch psi power? Dissolving weapon is an allowable pre-buff, provided you have 4 levels of Psychic Warrior, or 5 levels in Psion with the Expanded Knowledge feat. But otherwise it is not allowed. I.E. if you can manifest the power yourself. Do caster levels that are mentioned after 'Prerequisites:' under magic items, or from other sources count as a prerequisite in CoCo? Example: Ioun Stones? How exactly does a Feather Token Whip grapple? It has a +15 Attack bonus but doesn't appear to have any strength. Is it just grapple in the square the person it was in? Assuming it is Str 10? If low level powers are purchased with manifesting services at a higher than minimum ML and augmented, how do you calculate the cost of these services? If my wizard was invisible and cast a touch spell, designating his familiar as toucher, could the familiar deliver the spell without breaking my wizard's invisibility? You share a spell (invis) normally. While invis you can cast spell on yourself and your allies without breaking the invis. If you invisible familiar attacks, then it breaks invis. If your familiar steps away from you and breaks the share spell link then it will become visible. Since the link is already broken, the familiar can attack and not break your invis. Check out the "Channel Power" ability of a psicrystal, which is basically the same thing as "deliver touch power" but applies to non-touch powers as well. It specifically breaks invisibility. In thinking about psycrystals I noticed that, unlike familare's, psycrystals are not forbidden from gaining feats due to HD. Nor does the psycrystal have a bab equal to its masters bab. Does the absense of these details in the description of psycrystals allow the creature to gain feats and bab increases due to HD? In the psionics section of the SRD the monster entry of the psycrystal states that only levels in psion and wilder are used to calculate the HD of the psycrystal. So does that mean that all psiwarriors with psycrystals have 0 HD psycrystals? Are Large weapons twice as long as medium size ones? And by comparison huge weapons are four times as long as medium ones? Also, how long are the weapons anyways? The reason I'm asking is because of this part of the invisibility spell: "Any part of an item that the subject carries but that extends more than 10 feet from it becomes visible." if you expand and are mounted with a lance - the last 10ft of it will extend beyond the invisibility. Where/how does a pixie get their special arrows? What do they cost? Do you pay credits for them? As the house rule for hiding in CoCo is "Hiding: You cannot hide within effects provided by spells or items that target you and give concealment or cover such as Blur, Concealing Amorpha and a Tower Shield." The question I have is may you hide within the feat Cloak Dance? How do you increase monster's xp/gp/ecl when they gain a level adjustment as the gain HD? Can you craft a magic item by hiring an NPC to cast the spell for you? Sorry but that would enable every character with the craft feat to craft every item since neither CL nor Spells are a requirement anymore Is the soulknife's 5th level ability, Shape Mind blade persistent? That is, once shaped, does the blade remember it's form the next time it is materialised? Can gladiators trade equipment before a match? PC trades with PC? PC trades with Cohort? PC trades with Mercenary? To become a Lich you must be construct your own Phylactery. By the reading of the SRD and the CoCo rules the first availble time a person can actually do this template is 11th to 15th level. As the person would gain greater then 120,000 gps in the level advancement for the quest reward. Would all of the money from those levels of advancement go into building the Phylactery? Or is there a special rule in CoCo that relates to quest rewards simply being you build a Phylactery? My question is thus- The MM provides rules on making new lycantropes. Does this mean that we could make charachters with types of lycanthropy other than what is presented in the MM (werebear, wereboar, dire wereboar, wererat, weretiger, werewolf)? Could I, for instance, have a werelizard character? As long as the animal has a listed entry in the MM you can make a Lycanthrope of it. The DCs for Control Shape change depending on whether or not their's a full moon. When is the moon full at the CoCo? Are you allowed to manifest Astral Constructs with the Fly ability in midair? Dovetailing that, are you allowed to summon flying creatures midair? If you can, does the maneuverability of the creature matter when doing so? (I.E. will having Average or worse maneuverability prevent this from happening since the creature can't hover?)A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it. Corrupt Weapon, found in the Blackguard Spell list, is the opposite of Bless Weapon, as what it does it provide a means to penetrate DR/Good. However, keep in mind neither spell is alignment based, so Bless Weapon is not a [Good] spell and Corrupt Weapon is not an [Evil] spell. Now, RP aside, since this spell can be applied in oil form, is there any ill consequence for a paladin using it on a weapon? (more specifically, is it an 'Evil Act' for purposes of the Paladin Code of Honor). Can i get a rules clarification on Smokesticks? Time to Activate, Duration of "Naturally", and wether or not a fire source is required to Activate it? Also, even though the effect reads "treat as the fog cloud spell" i have seen it argued that it must be "heavy smoke" per the smoke rules, although i see nothing indicating such in the Fog Cloud Spell description. Concentration, Prestidigitaion, Slight of Hand, and Tumble, as a combo: all allow for amazing reduction of action cost without the need of a feat. All Slight of Hand actions can be done as free actions. Slight of Hand, Tumble, and Concentration allow you to take varius actions without provoking attacks of opportunity. Prestidigitation cannot be used to draw items. The spell is there to entertain mostly, and perhaps there might come up one or the other situation when it is really useful but it never replaces feats, nor does it damage. Due to the freestyle nature of this spell, it requires DM (here: pitlord) judgement and this should always take balance and the effects into consideration. Can the Dust of Tracelessness be used to pinpoint an invisible oponent? upto post 107
McJarvis 11-18-06, 05:32 PM	Mostly because I want to be the first to use the oracle :) (that is, instead of posting this in fights of the week...) I forget- Do Core rules state that you reroll tied initiative, or give it to the person with the higher initiative score?
MindWandererB 11-18-06, 05:35 PM	I forget- Do Core rules state that you reroll tied initiative, or give it to the person with the higher initiative score?Higher initiative modifier. Reroll if the modifier is the same.
Zevox 11-18-06, 05:55 PM	Okay then, since this needs an answer and the Council has been hijacked by Iron Man discussions: How do monster allies impact the rewards of a fight? Since we have a fight with such this week where the ones with the monster won, it is rather important that we get an answer. Could the Elders come to some accord? The multi-interleague-team-guild fight, involving 2 ECL 6 PCs, 1 ECL 5 PC, and a pair of Giant Eagles against 1 ECL 10, was originally rewarded with each participant getting 1/6 of the reward. I'm really not sure about those rewards. Then again, I don't think we even have a rule for this. My logic would be this: 1) The monsters should only count as one ally, since they're one roll. That would mean a 4-person team, not 5. 2) I'm really not sure whether they should apply to everyone, or just Celia. The idea is that they'd augment her to an effective ECL of 7, while the ECL 6 characters need a surprise round to be considered ECL 7. 3) I would think that technically, the surprise rounds or handicap are supposed to make the character effectively 1 or 2 ECLs higher than normal. I should think their rewards should reflect that, although there's no rule for this. Valid points all around. We should bring this up in the council to be discussed. In my opinion the rewards should be weighted by ECL, like quest rewards are/were (don't know if they still are or not) - so in this fight: Valek and M. Hood would receive 6/23 of the total exp; Ceilia would receive 5/23 and each of the eagles would receive 3/23. If we adjust the rewards according to the two ECL6 being ECL7 for their surprise round and the ECL 5 and the two ECL3 as being a single ECL7 share - then the exp would be divvied 3 ways at that level, and then split in half for Ceilia and the two eagles (who would receive half of that...). Still - I'll defer to a greater decision on this one. At least internally the ratio of gp:xp is kept consistent. Making them higher ECL for Leif's rewards is a moot point - since he's frozen anyway. Telin's suggestion is more industrious, but perhaps more fair. The simplest solution would be to grant the two ECL 6 characters 1/3 of the rewards, and split the remaining 1/3 between the ECL 5 and the eagles (which are ECL 3 each). The surprise round--which wasn't actually granted in this case--should be worth something, though.\ I'd say to just keep the whole thing simple. Give everyone rewards for a battle at their ECL. The Core ECL rules don't take into account the things we use to adjust the ECL of a battle (such as the surprise round). Allies don't recieve rewards as a character in any way. Not even mercenaries. They should only play a role in the decision about who gets how much rewards by using ally penalties if at all. CoCo encounters are not equal to normal Core encounters. It's all contrived and balanced so that all characters have fare fights at their ECL. Rewards should reflect that. K.I.S.S. I'm no elder, but if I may be allowed to reiterate my opinion: For Guild fights like this where monster allies are supposed to be a bonus to the player to even an uneven fight, I'd be of the opinion that they shouldn't impact rewards (just like the free merc a handicapped player gets). In normal fights with monster allies my vote would go to them being based on CR/ECL or EL - much like Telin's suggestion, but simply treating the monster/group of monsters as another participant (so in this case [if it weren't a Guild fight], the two CR 3 eagles are EL 5 (right?), so the ECL 6s get 6/22 of the rewards each, and the ECL 5 gets 5/22 of the rewards). What I don't think is that every monster should get treated as an equal participant, the way Telin originally did it - that would end up with it being a huge disadvantage for players to get large numbers of monster allies, since they'd siphon off most of the reward even though they're likely weaker and of less help than a single more powerful ally would be. Zevox Well, handicapped players get monsters now, not mercs. But you think a handicalled player should get the full reward for beating a higher-level character, even though they have the help of an ally of their own strength? That doesn't make much sense. I think going with 6/22 and 5/22 reward would be appropriate. However, Sauro's idea (i.e. rewards are as if you beat one opponent of your own El by yourself) is also fine, and would usually work out to be in the same ballpark. I would back either solution. Eh, I know Sauro's idea is simpler, but I prefer the possibility of getting higher rewards from a harder fight like that, which the former allows. I suppose either would do though. Zevox Here's an example: ECL 5 character beating ECL 5 opponent: 1500 XP. ECL 6 character beating ECL 6 opponent: 1800 XP. ECL 5 character getting 5/22 share from beating ECL 10 opponent: 2045 XP. ECL 6 character getting 6/22 share from beating ECL 10 opponent: 1963 XP. So, yeah, it's something. Not a whole lot except for the really low-level character. Also, I should point out that I still don't know how team WAR got an ally for this fight, since it brought them up to 5 combatants total (counting the monsters as 1). That shouldn't ever happen again.
Milov 11-18-06, 05:55 PM	I've a question as well. Efficient Quiver: This appears to be a typical arrow container capable of holding about twenty arrows. It has three distinct portions, each with a nondimensional space allowing it to store far more than would normally be possible. The first and smallest one can contain up to sixty objects of the same general size and shape as an arrow. The second slightly longer compartment holds up to eighteen objects of the same general size and shape as a javelin. The third and longest portion of the case contains as many as six objects of the same general size and shape as a bow (spears, staffs, or the like). Once the owner has filled it, the quiver can produce any item she wishes, as if from a regular quiver or scabbard. The efficient quiver weighs the same no matter what’s placed inside it. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Wondrous Item, secret chest; Price 1,800 gp;Weight 2 lb. As stated there, the quiver can hold roughly 60 arrows, 18 javelins, and about 6 other weapon-ish objects. Now I'm curious, if one were to place arrows into each of the three sections of the quiver, how many could each hold? I know the one can hold 60, but are the other two bigger spaces, and thus able to hold more arrows, or are they roughly the same size and able to hold the same quantity of arrows?
Zelck 11-18-06, 06:04 PM	As stated there, the quiver can hold roughly 60 arrows, 18 javelins, and about 6 other weapon-ish objects. Now I'm curious, if one were to place arrows into each of the three sections of the quiver, how many could each hold? I know the one can hold 60, but are the other two bigger spaces, and thus able to hold more arrows, or are they roughly the same size and able to hold the same quantity of arrows? And to add to this, what if the arrows are bundled/wrapped into javelin and lance shapes?
Zevox 11-20-06, 10:37 AM	Okay then, since this needs an answer and the Council has been hijacked by Iron Man discussions: How do monster allies impact the rewards of a fight? Since we have a fight with such this week where the ones with the monster won, it is rather important that we get an answer. Could the Elders come to some accord? The multi-interleague-team-guild fight, involving 2 ECL 6 PCs, 1 ECL 5 PC, and a pair of Giant Eagles against 1 ECL 10, was originally rewarded with each participant getting 1/6 of the reward. I'm really not sure about those rewards. Then again, I don't think we even have a rule for this. My logic would be this: 1) The monsters should only count as one ally, since they're one roll. That would mean a 4-person team, not 5. 2) I'm really not sure whether they should apply to everyone, or just Celia. The idea is that they'd augment her to an effective ECL of 7, while the ECL 6 characters need a surprise round to be considered ECL 7. 3) I would think that technically, the surprise rounds or handicap are supposed to make the character effectively 1 or 2 ECLs higher than normal. I should think their rewards should reflect that, although there's no rule for this. Valid points all around. We should bring this up in the council to be discussed. In my opinion the rewards should be weighted by ECL, like quest rewards are/were (don't know if they still are or not) - so in this fight: Valek and M. Hood would receive 6/23 of the total exp; Ceilia would receive 5/23 and each of the eagles would receive 3/23. If we adjust the rewards according to the two ECL6 being ECL7 for their surprise round and the ECL 5 and the two ECL3 as being a single ECL7 share - then the exp would be divvied 3 ways at that level, and then split in half for Ceilia and the two eagles (who would receive half of that...). Still - I'll defer to a greater decision on this one. At least internally the ratio of gp:xp is kept consistent. Making them higher ECL for Leif's rewards is a moot point - since he's frozen anyway. Telin's suggestion is more industrious, but perhaps more fair. The simplest solution would be to grant the two ECL 6 characters 1/3 of the rewards, and split the remaining 1/3 between the ECL 5 and the eagles (which are ECL 3 each). The surprise round--which wasn't actually granted in this case--should be worth something, though.\ I'd say to just keep the whole thing simple. Give everyone rewards for a battle at their ECL. The Core ECL rules don't take into account the things we use to adjust the ECL of a battle (such as the surprise round). Allies don't recieve rewards as a character in any way. Not even mercenaries. They should only play a role in the decision about who gets how much rewards by using ally penalties if at all. CoCo encounters are not equal to normal Core encounters. It's all contrived and balanced so that all characters have fare fights at their ECL. Rewards should reflect that. K.I.S.S. I'm no elder, but if I may be allowed to reiterate my opinion: For Guild fights like this where monster allies are supposed to be a bonus to the player to even an uneven fight, I'd be of the opinion that they shouldn't impact rewards (just like the free merc a handicapped player gets). In normal fights with monster allies my vote would go to them being based on CR/ECL or EL - much like Telin's suggestion, but simply treating the monster/group of monsters as another participant (so in this case [if it weren't a Guild fight], the two CR 3 eagles are EL 5 (right?), so the ECL 6s get 6/22 of the rewards each, and the ECL 5 gets 5/22 of the rewards). What I don't think is that every monster should get treated as an equal participant, the way Telin originally did it - that would end up with it being a huge disadvantage for players to get large numbers of monster allies, since they'd siphon off most of the reward even though they're likely weaker and of less help than a single more powerful ally would be. Zevox Well, handicapped players get monsters now, not mercs. But you think a handicalled player should get the full reward for beating a higher-level character, even though they have the help of an ally of their own strength? That doesn't make much sense. I think going with 6/22 and 5/22 reward would be appropriate. However, Sauro's idea (i.e. rewards are as if you beat one opponent of your own El by yourself) is also fine, and would usually work out to be in the same ballpark. I would back either solution. Eh, I know Sauro's idea is simpler, but I prefer the possibility of getting higher rewards from a harder fight like that, which the former allows. I suppose either would do though. Zevox Here's an example: ECL 5 character beating ECL 5 opponent: 1500 XP. ECL 6 character beating ECL 6 opponent: 1800 XP. ECL 5 character getting 5/22 share from beating ECL 10 opponent: 2045 XP. ECL 6 character getting 6/22 share from beating ECL 10 opponent: 1963 XP. So, yeah, it's something. Not a whole lot except for the really low-level character. Also, I should point out that I still don't know how team WAR got an ally for this fight, since it brought them up to 5 combatants total (counting the monsters as 1). That shouldn't ever happen again. Okay, not to sound overly impatient, but could there please be a decision made on this? We do have a fight this week that its important for, and I believe I'll be activating Ceilia next week too, so it may be important to know the rewards quite soon here... Zevox
Macbrea 11-20-06, 01:07 PM	Ok, I have a question in relation to how universal items, djores, and spell casting service prebuffs are affected by psionic hole in CoCo. [General] You are anathema to psionic creatures and characters. Prerequisite Con 15. Benefit When a foe strikes you in melee combat, the foe immediately loses its psionic focus, if any. Also, if you are the target of a power, the manifester of the power must spend an additional number of power points equal to your Wisdom bonus, or the power fails (all the power points spent on the power are still lost). This extra cost does not count toward the maximum power points a manifester can spend on a single power. Special You cannot take or use this feat if you have the ability to use powers (if you have a power point reserve or psi-like abilities).
Gonbow 11-20-06, 02:17 PM	So, I've got a question/clarification about situational skill modifiers and Free Action skills. Namely, there are lots of modifiers floating around that affect things like Appraise, Craft and Gather Information in strict core material. Can this bonus then be used with free activities like.. Discount? (My ranger/rogue will get his discount from only his favored enemy, mmkay?) Sell Items? (My dwarven ranger/rogue will sell his stone-related items only to his favored enemy, mmkay?) How about Automatic Skill packages? A ranger would get his bonus against his opponent when it comes to determining Ambush, Assassinate, Scout, right? How about a dwarf setting a stone trap? Or detecting one? How about Single Skill activies... Earning Money? (If a dwarf's 'craft' of choice is something directly related to stone, my recent character Ashyertian is a good example of this) Use Blackmarket Connections? (I'm definitely going to the blackmarket run by the Humanoid (Humans)!) Or other things... A dwarf can of course, use his bonus to Craft (Armorsmithing) and Craft (Weaponsmithing) as nearly everything under that is metal, right? So he'd only need a +8 modifier (before racial bonus) to craft, say, an Adamantine dwarven waraxe, right? How about less core-specific machninations, like the UA Bloodlines. All of them grant a ranger-style bonus to various social skills involving -foo-. Can these be applied to situations where the skill would be used for a Free/Single/Other activity? Is the 'malleable theme' of CoCo enough to explain a silver dragon run blackmarket and artificers?
hogarth 11-20-06, 02:30 PM	Ok, I have a question in relation to how universal items, djores, and spell casting service prebuffs are affected by psionic hole in CoCo. Technincally, you didn't ask a question. :D My opinions: 1) Universal items work since they're not the same as manifesting a power. 2) Dorjes don't work since they're already augmented to the maximum possible. A gladiator with Psionic Hole certainly couldn't use a dorje on herself (since she can't have levels in a manifesting class). A power manifested from a dorje is still a manifested power, so Psionic Hole would apply. 3) An NPC manifester would need a ML equal to the minimum for that power + 4 levels (in order to be able to affect the gladiator in question). For example, paying an NPC to manifest Share Pain on you would cost (ML 7)x(power level 2)x10 = 140 gp (minimum).
hogarth 11-20-06, 02:37 PM	So, I've got a question/clarification about situational skill modifiers and Free Action skills. Namely, there are lots of modifiers floating around that affect things like Appraise, Craft and Gather Information in strict core material. Can this bonus then be used with free activities like.. [lots of stuff deleted] My opinion is: 1) yes, in the case of a skill use with a specific target where the target clearly qualifies for the bonus (e.g. a dwarf using Craft to make a metal shield or using Appraise to get a discount on the purchase of a Stone of Good Luck), and 2) no, where a specific target is not specified for the skill use (e.g. a ranger with Favored Enemy [Ooze] can't use her Bluff and Sense Motive bonuses to get a discount on the purchase of a Stone of Good Luck).
SauroGrenom 11-20-06, 02:50 PM	Okay, not to sound overly impatient, but could there please be a decision made on this? We do have a fight this week that its important for, and I believe I'll be activating Ceilia next week too, so it may be important to know the rewards quite soon here... ZevoxPenalties are only recieved if the allies in question are not effecting the ECL of the encounter. Diplomacy allies, Cohorts, Mercenaries and HA allies are the only types that effect rewards in any way. Allies that are used by pitlords to "balance" encounters are not the source of penalties of any kind. Generally everything in CoCo is setup so that all encounters are at your ECL regardless of whom or what you are fighting. For complicated battles with teams and with monster allies or surprise or other kinds of allies used to make a fare encounter at a higher ECL, we simply award XP and GP to all players for a battle at their ECL. Only after this are the non-ECL effecting allies (diplomacy, cohorst and so on ...) figured into the rewards for each character.
TheMagister 11-20-06, 03:00 PM	Generally everything in CoCo is setup so that all encounters are at your ECL regardless of whom or what you are fighting. For complicated battles with teams and with monster allies or surprise or other kinds of allies used to make a fare encounter at a higher ECL, we simply award XP and GP to all players for a battle at their ECL. Only after this are the non-ECL effecting allies (diplomacy, cohorst and so on ...) figured into the rewards for each character. So basically, the ECL 6s get ECL 6 vs. ECL 6 xp, the ECL 5s get ECL 5 vs. ECL 5 xp? TM
SauroGrenom 11-20-06, 03:02 PM	So basically, the ECL 6s get ECL 6 vs. ECL 6 xp, the ECL 5s get ECL 5 vs. ECL 5 xp? TM Yes. Then modify that by ally penalties if there are cohorts, diplomacy allies, HA allies, or merecenaries which are associated with one character or another and which don't modify the ECL level of that character.
MindWandererB 11-20-06, 08:47 PM	Yes. Then modify that by ally penalties if there are cohorts, diplomacy allies, HA allies, or merecenaries which are associated with one character or another and which don't modify the ECL level of that character. Unfortunately, we now have 3 elders with 3 different opinions. Let's go with Sauro's solution for now, since we need one ASAP. We can continue the discussion later if necessary.
McJarvis 11-21-06, 11:00 PM	Sauro mentioned he didn't know that he approved of Poe's use of Unseen Servant during Poe's last fight, so why don't we hash this out(before I use it for other stuff too)? I use Unseen Servant alot at my table top games. Uses include: Reloading crossbows(heavy, light, repeating) Reloading slings Applying poison to weapons Triggering traps Etc, Etc. Obviously, with a little creativity this spell can be used for great things. Why wouldn't the unseen servant be able to do these relatively easy tasks?
Macbrea 11-22-06, 08:26 AM	Here is my questions on Psionic situations vs psionic hole: 1) Kraknol with his power storing flail has (prebuffed) dissolving weapon and a stored power of (Spell Casting Services ML 6) cold energy missile added to the flail. He strikes a character with Psionic hole. What happens power wise? 2) Cyrus uses power stone energy ray [ML 2] vs Vladmir whom has Psionic hole. What is the effects? I realize the power requires the Manifester spend wisdom bonus extra power points but at what point must the person spend them? When the power is manifested or when it comes in contact with the target? Best I can figure Kroknol's flail should fail entirely. Same would be true of Cyrus' power stone. Someone could argue that ML 6 energy missile only requires 3 pp be spent on the power itself and that if it hit someone with a +2 wisdom bonus it would still go off with 4 pp invested in the power.
SauroGrenom 11-22-06, 09:21 AM	Sauro mentioned he didn't know that he approved of Poe's use of Unseen Servant during Poe's last fight, so why don't we hash this out(before I use it for other stuff too)? I use Unseen Servant alot at my table top games. Uses include: Reloading crossbows(heavy, light, repeating) Reloading slings Applying poison to weapons Triggering traps Etc, Etc. Obviously, with a little creativity this spell can be used for great things. Why wouldn't the unseen servant be able to do these relatively easy tasks?I agree that the spell can be used for various interesting things, but what is the Unseen Servant? What kind of creature is it? Does it have stats? What's the movement speed? The spell description says that "It can run and fetch things, open unstuck doors, and hold chairs, as well as clean and mend. The servant can perform only one activity at a time, but it repeats the same activity over and over again if told to do so as long as you remain within range." So it can run, but what's the speed? The spell has a very limited range, so if the caster outruns the servant, it's out of range, and it dissapears. Also in your specific case you use the servant to load a sling, but it doesn't posess the sling. You need to hand the sling to your servant for it to do that, and I'd say that handing an object to another creature is a move action.
hogarth 11-22-06, 09:27 AM	I agree that the spell can be used for various interesting things, but what is the Unseen Servant? What kind of creature is it? Does it have stats? What's the movement speed? These questions are answered in the spell description: 1) it's shapeless and invisible 2) it has 2 Strength and 6 "hit points" (no other stats) 3) it has a speed of 15 feet My opinions on McJarvis's suggestions: 1) It could reload stuff for you, but it wouldn't necessarily be any faster (since you have to pass the crossbow+bolts/sling+stones over to the servant and then take it back). 2) Applying poison is too complicated (IMO). 3) It says in the spell description that triggering traps is possible, but it can only exert 20 lbs of force.
SauroGrenom 11-22-06, 09:47 AM	Here is my questions on Psionic situations vs psionic hole: 1) Kraknol with his power storing flail has (prebuffed) dissolving weapon and a stored power of (Spell Casting Services ML 6) cold energy missile added to the flail. He strikes a character with Psionic hole. What happens power wise? 2) Cyrus uses power stone energy ray [ML 2] vs Vladmir whom has Psionic hole. What is the effects? I realize the power requires the Manifester spend wisdom bonus extra power points but at what point must the person spend them? When the power is manifested or when it comes in contact with the target? Best I can figure Kroknol's flail should fail entirely. Same would be true of Cyrus' power stone. Someone could argue that ML 6 energy missile only requires 3 pp be spent on the power itself and that if it hit someone with a +2 wisdom bonus it would still go off with 4 pp invested in the power.We've looked at this before in the past. The consensus is that the Psionic Hole feat must be read directly and carefully to figure out how to properly use this feat.Benefit: When a foe strikes you in melee combat, the foe immediately loses its psionic focus, if any. Also, if you are the target of a power, the manifester of the power must spend an additional number of power points equal to your Wisdom bonus, or the power fails (all the power points spent on the power are still lost). This extra cost does not count toward the maximum power points a manifester can spend on a single power.Notice how the feat increases the PP cost of powers targeted at the character. This is important. Only targeted powers manifest on the character are increased in pp cost. That means that area powers, and things like Dissolving weapon which target a weapon are not subject to the feat's effects. As for targeted powers manifest by items, I've looked and there are a few items that actually contain pp not just a power. Psicrowns, cognizance crystals and powerstoring weapons are examples. All other psionic items simply manifest a power and have the effect with no reference to the number of PP required. I think these items simply have their effect even if targeted at a character with psionic hole. But the powerstoring weapon would have diminished or no effect. In the example with Krackonl, his weapon has 5PP and an augmented Dissolving Touch. If he strikes someone with psionic hole and uses the powerstoring effect, then the number of pp available for augmentation would be diminished. The effect would be a 2d6 or 3d6 damage instead of 5d6. If he had a power stored that required 5pp, then the powerstoring effect would fail (and he would choose not to discharge it).
Macbrea 11-22-06, 09:52 AM	So, items like djores that have readings like: Dorjes are normally created at the minimum manifester level required to manifest the power, and powers that can be augmented are not augmented when stored in a dorje. A dorje’s wielder cannot augment the power contained within the dorje. However, dorjes can be created at a higher manifester level than required to manifest the power. In this case, the dorje that holds an augmentable power is augmented, to the limit of the manifester level and the power’s augmentation maximums, if any. The manifester level of a dorje cannot be more than five higher than the minimum manifester level to use the power it contains. Means that it has a set number of power points in them and uses them as if it was manifesting the power with pp.
SauroGrenom 11-22-06, 09:56 AM	So, items like djores that have readings like: Dorjes are normally created at the minimum manifester level required to manifest the power, and powers that can be augmented are not augmented when stored in a dorje. A dorje’s wielder cannot augment the power contained within the dorje. However, dorjes can be created at a higher manifester level than required to manifest the power. In this case, the dorje that holds an augmentable power is augmented, to the limit of the manifester level and the power’s augmentation maximums, if any. The manifester level of a dorje cannot be more than five higher than the minimum manifester level to use the power it contains. Means that it has a set number of power points in them and uses them as if it was manifesting the power with pp.Notice that it doens't talk about PP at all. Only Manifester levels asre mentioned. This is the distinction that I want to draw. A few items actually do talk about PP, while some talk about Manifester levels. In the case of a dorje, it says the item stores several uses of the power, ther is no mention of whether the dorje has enough pp to manifest the power several times.
Macbrea 11-22-06, 10:02 AM	The creation of a Dorje states: The act of working on the dorje costs a number of power points per day equal to the power point cost of the power that is being embedded in the crystal of the dorje. Which seems to indicate that it has stored power points.
Guildmaster_LOY 11-22-06, 10:05 AM	I'm supprised at you Sauro....the begining flavor text of Psionic Hole says that the feat makes you "A curse to psionic creatures and characters", clearly leaving out psionic items in that wording. After all, we have to take the flavor text as "primary source" :P ;) :D edit- Of course, I think it applies to all psionic items as well, but the text says....
McJarvis 11-22-06, 10:09 AM	All that aside-> Does psionic hole work on ray effects?
SauroGrenom 11-22-06, 10:11 AM	Clearly not. Look at how long it takes to make a Dorje of Skate. This thing only costs 750gp and takes a day and 1pp for that day. But you suggest it contains 50pp. Where did the other 49pp come from? No. That must be wrong. The crafter does not fill the dorje up with enough pp to manifest the power 50 times. When you craft the item it gains the ability to release stored powers. The powers are already effectively manifest. All that remains is to aim the power.
SauroGrenom 11-22-06, 10:12 AM	All that aside-> Does psionic hole work on ray effects? Since Rays are not technicially targeted powers, no.
hogarth 11-22-06, 10:15 AM	Notice that it doens't talk about PP at all. Only Manifester levels are mentioned. This is the distinction that I want to draw. A few items actually do talk about PP, while some talk about Manifester levels. In the case of a dorje, it says the item stores several uses of the power, ther is no mention of whether the dorje has enough pp to manifest the power several times. Here are the parts of the descriptions that I noticed: ..if you are the target of a power, the manifester of the power must spend an additional number of power points.. ..manifesting a power from a dorje is usually a standard action.. From this, I concluded the following: 1) Using a charge from a dorje is "manifesting a power". 2) Manifesting a power on a character with Psionic Hole requires additional power points (if her Wis bonus is greater than zero). Therefore: 3) Manifesting a power from a dorje will fail on a character with Psionic Hole (if her Wis bonus is greater than zero) unless the manifester pays additional power points. There's probably room to argue that using a dorje is different than manifesting a power, but the rules do refer to "manifesting" from a dorje.
SauroGrenom 11-22-06, 10:20 AM	Here are the parts of the descriptions that I noticed: From this, I concluded the following: 1) Using a charge from a dorje is "manifesting a power". 2) Manifesting a power on a character with Psionic Hole requires additional power points (if her Wis bonus is greater than zero). 3) Dorjes don't have power points. Therefore: 4) Manifesting a power from a dorje will fail on a character with Psionic Hole (if her Wis bonus is greater than zero) unless the manifester pays additional power points. There's probably room to argue that using a dorje is different than manifesting a power, but the rules do refer to "manifesting" from a dorje. Except that Dorje's are not manifesters. They don't have class levels in a manifesting class. They don't have pp. They don't qualify for metapsionic feats. The Psionic Hole feat doesn't apply.
McJarvis 11-22-06, 10:22 AM	Since Rays are not technicially targeted powers, no. Ok, this opens up a completely unrelated line of conversation for me then :) Can a tower shield block a ray then? They provide full cover except for the special case of targeted spells. I judged that tower shields couldn't block rays in a fight a few weeks back & it made a big difference since one of the combatents had a dorjes of crystal shard.
hogarth 11-22-06, 10:27 AM	Except that Dorje's are not manifesters. They don't have class levels in a manifesting class. They don't have pp. They don't qualify for metapsionic feats. The Psionic Hole feat doesn't apply. It clearly states that the wielder of a dorje is "manifesting a power from a dorje". Psionic Hole comes into effect when someone manifests a power. In my personal campaign, I could probably go either way, but from a Rules-As-Written standpoint it looks like Psionic Hole applies with dorjes and power stones like it does with any other manifested power.
McJarvis 11-22-06, 10:30 AM	It clearly states that the wielder of a dorje is "manifesting a power from a dorje". Psionic Hole comes into effect when someone manifests a power. In my personal campaign, I could probably go either way, but from a Rules-As-Written standpoint it looks like Psionic Hole applies with dorjes like it does with any other manifested power. It looks to me like the user of the dorjes turns into the manifester with a manifester level equal to that of the dorjes(and minimum casting stat to manifest the power). It would make sense that the wielder of the dorjes would have to pay the extra pp cost. Also-> This would be more in line with the original text of the feat, which says it only affects psionic creatures and characters.
SauroGrenom 11-22-06, 10:55 AM	Mc Jarvis has a good point in that the text of the feat says it applies to creatures and not items. I just took a shower, and as sometimes happens a thought came to me which makes things more clear. There are only a few examples in the rules where it is specifically stated that items manifest using pp. It is easy to assume that all items have a hidden pp reserve and that is doled out as it manifests various powers. However this is wrong. We cannot assume that all items use pp to manifest powers. Only those cases where the item description specificially states that it uses pp to manifest the power are applicable to this feat. In all other cases we are not sure if the items use pp to manifest powers at all. Now I'm leaving today on a 4 day vacation, and I cannot participate in any more of the discussions durring that time. My internet access will not be certian or likely. I've given my opinion, and if a majority of other elders dissagree, then the majority shall decide the issue.
SauroGrenom 11-22-06, 10:57 AM	It looks to me like the user of the dorjes turns into the manifester with a manifester level equal to that of the dorjes(and minimum casting stat to manifest the power). It would make sense that the wielder of the dorjes would have to pay the extra pp cost. Also-> This would be more in line with the original text of the feat, which says it only affects psionic creatures and characters.The rules specificially state that you must use only one source to manifest a power. This option to charge the user more pp is not allowed by the rules.
Gonbow 11-22-06, 11:03 AM	Even if something doesn't use PP to manifest powers, it should still be affected by this feat. Psionic Hole as a feat, makes very little sense if it has no effect on most items and all Psi-like abilities; both of which involving manifesting powers, which seems to be the main trigger for the feat. The spending of extra PP is just the result. If you cant pay the extra PP (which we have determined that most items cant) then the power fails. Just my two cents from looking at it as a logical cause-effect/alternate effect chain.
hogarth 11-22-06, 11:05 AM	Psionic Hole as a feat, makes very little sense if it has no effect on most items and all Psi-like abilities; both of which involving manifesting powers, which seems to be the main trigger for the feat. Using a psi-like ability is not manifesting a power, so it would not be affected by Psionic Hole.
Milov 11-22-06, 12:01 PM	I don't mean to sounds impatient or anything, but I'm noticing questions asked after the one I asked are getting answered and debated over and whatnot first, so... yeah... Here's the concepts and single addition to it so far, and if possible, could a descision, even if a temporary one, be reached before next week? It'll determine how I handle more ammunition for my Sea Elf after his last fight for this cycle, which happens this week. I've a question as well. Efficient Quiver: This appears to be a typical arrow container capable of holding about twenty arrows. It has three distinct portions, each with a nondimensional space allowing it to store far more than would normally be possible. The first and smallest one can contain up to sixty objects of the same general size and shape as an arrow. The second slightly longer compartment holds up to eighteen objects of the same general size and shape as a javelin. The third and longest portion of the case contains as many as six objects of the same general size and shape as a bow (spears, staffs, or the like). Once the owner has filled it, the quiver can produce any item she wishes, as if from a regular quiver or scabbard. The efficient quiver weighs the same no matter what’s placed inside it. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Wondrous Item, secret chest; Price 1,800 gp;Weight 2 lb. As stated there, the quiver can hold roughly 60 arrows, 18 javelins, and about 6 other weapon-ish objects. Now I'm curious, if one were to place arrows into each of the three sections of the quiver, how many could each hold? I know the one can hold 60, but are the other two bigger spaces, and thus able to hold more arrows, or are they roughly the same size and able to hold the same quantity of arrows? And to add to this, what if the arrows are bundled/wrapped into javelin and lance shapes?
Macbrea 11-22-06, 01:43 PM	Strickly speaking according to the rules it could hold 84 arrows. That being 60 + 18 + 6. The item isn't designed to carry more then that number of items. There is no rules for strapping a bunch of arrows together to form 1 javelin.
MindWandererB 11-22-06, 02:02 PM	Strickly speaking according to the rules it could hold 84 arrows. That being 60 + 18 + 6. The item isn't designed to carry more then that number of items. There is no rules for strapping a bunch of arrows together to form 1 javelin. As I said before, strictly speaking, it can hold 60. It says nothing about the larger components being able to hold smaller objects.
Macbrea 11-22-06, 02:09 PM	:P It doesn't make many distinctions on size that have any real meaning. Is that Efficient quiver Small, Medium or Large sized? As strickly speaking you couldn't fit Large arrows in a medium sized efficient quiver. As they are arrow shaped but much larger. Ammunition needs to be marked on character sheets as Small and Medium ammunition as it effects both weight, damage and size of the ammunition. The question comes in does the 18 javelin section able to fit 18 tiny ballista bolts in it?
Erithmu 11-23-06, 11:09 AM	Question: Powerstones that are Psi war only. Do they use the standard pricing or the higher manifester level that a Psi war has when they gain the power? I know that there is option for a Expanded Knowledge (power) from a psion for credits. I remember seeing this on Hagrid II w/ Steadfast Perrception I'm just curious as this might affect some other powers such as dissolving weapon.
TheMagister 11-23-06, 01:05 PM	How would Fell Shot interact with someone who is taking full cover behind a tower shield? 50% miss chance? 20%? None? Can't attack that person at all? Thanks? TM? :P ?
McJarvis 11-23-06, 01:08 PM	How would Fell Shot interact with someone who is taking full cover behind a tower shield? 50% miss chance? 20%? None? Can't attack that person at all? Thanks? TM? :P ? Bingo. Reasoning: It doesn't let you shoot through walls either. (no matter how thin)
McJarvis 11-23-06, 01:21 PM	Can a manifester manifest powers while under the effects of Gaseous Form? edit- Furthermore, can you use dorjes? powerstones? etc? double edit-> The spell says you can't run..does this mean you still have a base land speed/burrow/swim/whatever speed & just can't take run actions?(plus the added 10 ft perfect manuverability fly) Thanks TM :)
TheMagister 11-23-06, 01:23 PM	Can a manifester manifest powers while under the effects of Gaseous Form? edit- Furthermore, can you use dorjes? powerstones? etc? ooo... Good angle.
Zelck 11-23-06, 01:44 PM	As I said before, strictly speaking, it can hold 60. It says nothing about the larger components being able to hold smaller objects. I wish to argue that it's possible to bundle together arrows to form "javelin-like" or "lance-like" shapes. Note that the description of efficient quiver specifies that the shape just has to be close: "The second slightly longer compartment holds up to eighteen objects of the same general size and shape as a javelin. The third and longest portion of the case contains as many as six objects of the same general size and shape as a bow (spears, staffs, or the like)." Since a javelin is one size category larger than an arrow, 8 arrows bundled together should be the same size as a javelin, and if bundled right, they'd be the same general shape as well. No reason why that shouldn't be allowed. @Psionic Hole: Just FYI, rays are targeted powers. The description for a ray says it's like a ranged attack, and ranged attacks are targeted. Otherwise, you can't use them with Chain Power either :P.
hogarth 11-23-06, 01:46 PM	Can a manifester manifest powers while under the effects of Gaseous Form? edit- Furthermore, can you use dorjes? powerstones? etc? double edit-> The spell says you can't run..does this mean you still have a base land speed/burrow/swim/whatever speed & just can't take run actions?(plus the added 10 ft perfect manuverability fly) Thanks TM :) The description doesn't forbid it. I considered getting a Wind Walk prebuff for Reginald Molehusband at one point -- it would be expensive, but you've got to admire that 600 ft fly speed! edit: By the way, it specifically states you can't activate items.
MindWandererB 11-23-06, 02:28 PM	Question: Powerstones that are Psi war only. Do they use the standard pricing or the higher manifester level that a Psi war has when they gain the power? I know that there is option for a Expanded Knowledge (power) from a psion for credits. I remember seeing this on Hagrid II w/ Steadfast Perrception I'm just curious as this might affect some other powers such as dissolving weapon.Standard pricing. You can always manifest a power at the minimum manifester level needed to use it, which is equal to the PP cost. No Expanded Knowledge necessary. Re: Gaseous Form: No items can be used, but powers can.
Sutro 11-24-06, 04:46 AM	Couple of things: Elan are aberrations, neat. But in the aberration subtype description, it states that all aberrations are proficient with whatever weapons they are described in their individual description as carrying, as well as all simple weapons and the armor they are wearing. Similar things would apply for the half-giant, etc., but I'll stick with the Elan for now. Since in the Elan description they carry a longbow, studded leather, a light shield and a warhammer, I am left to assume they're proficient with all these? Also - My performance type is chanting, which you can't really make an instrument for in its raw state. However, in the description of the masterwork instrument, it states verbatim: A masterwork instrument grants a +2 circumstance bonus on Perform checks involving its use. As such, can I get a set of drums to accompany my chanting outside the arena to boost my perform check for free activities? I think the drums would definitely add something my chanting, and I can easily involve them. Or is that a little too loose of an interpretation of "involve"? :P -Sutro
Vathelokai 11-24-06, 09:25 AM	Couple of things: Elan are aberrations, neat. But in the aberration subtype description, it states that all aberrations are proficient with whatever weapons they are described in their individual description as carrying, as well as all simple weapons and the armor they are wearing. Similar things would apply for the half-giant, etc., but I'll stick with the Elan for now. Since in the Elan description they carry a longbow, studded leather, a light shield and a warhammer, I am left to assume they're proficient with all these? I do believe they are. I've never heard anything to the contrary.My performance type is chanting, which you can't really make an instrument for in its raw state. However, in the description of the masterwork instrument, it states verbatim: A masterwork instrument grants a +2 circumstance bonus on Perform checks involving its use. As such, can I get a set of drums to accompany my chanting outside the arena to boost my perform check for free activities? I think the drums would definitely add something my chanting, and I can easily involve them. Or is that a little too loose of an interpretation of "involve"? :P -SutroThere was a vote at one point where it was decided that the mw perform tool could be anything. It started because a bard named Hennan bought some MW 'vocal implants' to help his singing. The debate revolved around weahter it was intended that the insturment was supposed to take up a hand spot. The vote came down 2 to 3 in favor of the loose definition.
MindWandererB 11-24-06, 08:31 PM	I do believe they are. I've never heard anything to the contrary.I hate it, because I believe the elan in question is proficient because he's a warrior, not because he's an elan, but the rule was phrased badly.
hogarth 11-25-06, 09:41 AM	If a character is mounted on a warhorse that doesn't know the "Attack Any" trick, can he nevertheless get it to attack an aberration or undead creature?
Erithmu 11-25-06, 10:49 AM	If a character is mounted on a warhorse that doesn't know the "Attack Any" trick, can he nevertheless get it to attack an aberration or undead creature? With a 'push' use of Handle Animal (DC 25 or 27 if animal is wounded) that is a full round action (or move if animal companion)
hogarth 11-25-06, 11:30 AM	With a 'push' use of Handle Animal (DC 25 or 27 if animal is wounded) that is a full round action (or move if animal companion) Maraxus's point was that since ordering your (war-trained) mount to attack while mounted doesn't require a Handle Animal check, then perhaps ordering it to "Attack Any" while mounted doesn't either. I don't agree with him, but there's an argument to be made there.
Vathelokai 11-25-06, 11:59 AM	Scrolls/Stones: Just like resist energy and other spells, expendables with polymorph (including Alter Self, Metamorphosis, Polymorph any Object, Shapechange) must be specified beforehand. Example: Scroll of Alter Self (Troglodyte). This only applies to expendables; not to memorized spells.The title specificly addresses scrolls and stones. The text addresses 'expendables' which are defined in CoCo as scrolls, potions, tattoos, and powerstones. Does this rule apply to wands, staffs, dorjes, and crowns? custom items with 50 charges? Charge per day items? Custom continuous use and command word items? The only example I can find is psionic skin of proteus. *EDIT* Also, as per Cat's request in the tavern, I'm bringing some questions to the elders. Would a ring of alterself (continous) only have one form, or could you change form every time the ring was put on (similar to an invis ring 'restarting' every time you put it on)? Custom thematic staffs? How tight does the theme have to be? Can I make a staff with spell resistance and spiritual weapon?
Erithmu 11-25-06, 12:12 PM	Maraxus's point was that since ordering your (war-trained) mount to attack while mounted doesn't require a Handle Animal check, then perhaps ordering it to "Attack Any" while mounted doesn't either. I don't agree with him, but there's an argument to be made there. Ordering to attack is still a move action, there is a ride check associated with the combination of mount and rider attacking, but that is handled as a free action. If the ride check fails then it looks like the rider doesn't get his/her attacks due to the mount attacking.
SauroGrenom 11-26-06, 12:28 PM	About the efficient quiver: This item holds 60 arrows. That's all the arrows you can fit into it. These are 60 arrows sized for the person who uses the quiver. Bundling arrows into various shapes it the relm of art, not in combat using weapons. What use is it if you reach into a quiver and pull out a bundle of arrows shaped like a javalin? You cannot fit that bundle to your bow string. I'd say it would take atleast a move action and two hands to un-bundle each arrow and make it available to use. This is totally useless in combat. The efficient quiver can hold only 60 arrows, and you cannot put arrows into the other sections and have them available for in combat use. If you want to have a bunch of arrows and you don't want to carry them around in combat, you can have a heavy sack of quivers and drop it as a free action in the 1st round of every battle. Psionic Hole: This feat only has an effect when the underlying psionic effect is specificially said to be manifest using pp. This means that powers manifest by manifesting characters and those manifest by psionic creatures using psi-like abilities and those powers manifest by cognizance crystals, powerstoring items and psicrowns are subject to this feat's effects. This feat does not grant immunity to all powerstones and most other psionic items. PSI-like abilities are augmented and PP are provided by the ability as a total equal to the HD of the creature. The psionic hole will result in a few cases where a psi-like ability fails to take effect, but most often the feat will simply decrease the augmentation available for the power. Psi Warrior Powerstones: It is my understanding that these items use the minimum ML for a Psi Warrior who manifests the power. This means that Dissolving weapon is a ML4 minimum. Gaseous Form: While in Gaseous form, you can manifest powers. You cannot use any items of any kind. You loose all forms of movement except 10 fly and supernatural forms of movement. Horses: The HA skill is rather direct. Animals will not attack undead and a few other kinds of creatures unless they are trained to attack anything. The entry in the Ride skill allows you to use the HA skill as a free action instead of a normal move action. If the animal is not trained correctly, then the animal won't Attack the undead. Vath's Question about Alter Self: This is a realy hard one. Since it's about a CoCo house rule, we'll need to hear from multiple CoCo elders and try to make the best of this. I'm tempted to say that staffs and crowns can be used by the caster to achieve any shape the caster can create. While all other items are locked into a particular shape by the person who crafts the item.
Zelck 11-26-06, 12:44 PM	About the efficient quiver:Bundling arrows into various shapes it the relm of art, not in combat using weapons. What use is it if you reach into a quiver and pull out a bundle of arrows shaped like a javalin? You cannot fit that bundle to your bow string. I'd say it would take atleast a move action and two hands to un-bundle each arrow and make it available to use. This is totally useless in combat. Wouldn't it make sense for someone just to take a move action or standard action or whatever is decided and unbundled one entire bundle of arrows (I think 8 for a javelin bundle and 64 for a lance bundle)? They could then put those arrows in the arrow compartment (assuming they've already spent a lot of arrows). Psi Warrior Powerstones: It is my understanding that these items use the minimum ML for a Psi Warrior who manifests the power. This means that Dissolving weapon is a ML4 minimum. IIRC there's no hard ML req for Psi Warriors to manifest powers. I think it only requires enough ML to be able to spend the power points required. If this ruling goes through, do Sorcerer and Bard scrolls also cost more?
NiQil 11-26-06, 01:02 PM	Wouldn't it make sense for someone just to take a move action or standard action or whatever is decided and unbundled one entire bundle of arrows (I think 8 for a javelin bundle and 64 for a lance bundle)? They could then put those arrows in the arrow compartment (assuming they've already spent a lot of arrows). This is something else that falls under the "real world logic vs game mechanic" category. By real world logic, what you want to do would work. By game mechanics it doesn't. I agree with with Sauro. The EQ holds 60 arrows in the arrow compartment...that's it. IIRC there's no hard ML req for Psi Warriors to manifest powers. I think it only requires enough ML to be able to spend the power points required. If this ruling goes through, do Sorcerer and Bard scrolls also cost more? Keep in mind, this is only for powers that are exclusive to the Psychic Warrior power list, such as Dissolving Weapon. If they are available under another classes' list (I'll use Biofeedback as an example), then you can purchase it at the lowest cost that it would be purchased at for all clases that had it available. Biofeedback is a Level 1 PsyWar power, but a level 2 Psion power. Psions can therefore purchase powerstones of Biofeedback as if made by a level 1 PsyWar. This would also be true for spells exclusive to the Sorcerer/Bard spell list, or spells that are attainable at different levels than a wizard or cleric can obtain them, using the same guidelines as I have mentioned above.
SauroGrenom 11-26-06, 01:06 PM	Wouldn't it make sense for someone just to take a move action or standard action or whatever is decided and unbundled one entire bundle of arrows (I think 8 for a javelin bundle and 64 for a lance bundle)? They could then put those arrows in the arrow compartment (assuming they've already spent a lot of arrows).And in the middle of combat where there are people running around and you are running around, how do you propose that you are going to un-bundle 8 arrows with 2 hands and less than 3 seconds? I challange you to imagine 8 arrows wrapped into a bundle shaped like a javalin. Then unwrap that bundle in 3 seconds just before or after you hustle 30' in less than 3 seconds. I suppose you have 10 hands. Clearly you must have 1 hand to catch each arrow as it's relaeased, and two hands to do the un-wrapping. Whatever. There is no game mechanic saying that if things of a smaller size are grouped together they become mechanicially equivalent to a larger thing. I don't think we should invent one. 2 humans bundled together so that one is standing on the shoulders of another are not equivalent to a large creature. They don't have a size bonus on grapple checks, they dont' have reach, such a silly configuration of humans is not a large creature in any way. Simularly I don't think that stacking a bunch of arrows on top of eachother makes a javalin for the purpose of game mechanics of any kind. IIRC there's no hard ML req for Psi Warriors to manifest powers. I think it only requires enough ML to be able to spend the power points required. If this ruling goes through, do Sorcerer and Bard scrolls also cost more?There is a ML requirement for a Psi Warrior to know a power. If you cannot know a 2nd level power, then you cannot manifest one. The minimum ML for a PSI warrior to know Dissolving Weapon is ML4. At least that's what we've been using for a long time. Sorcerers and bards simly have arcane scrolls, not a seperate level for the spells they cast. If there are spells cast at a lower level by a bard than a wizard, then it is perfectly viable to buy a bard version of the scroll.
Maraxus 11-26-06, 01:14 PM	Oh, there is the point again. Right, I thought, that the DC 10 ride check "Fight with warhorse"... If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action. ...includes, that you make your mount attack and no additional handle animal check is required. Sure, it does not explicitly say so, but I have never seen a rider needing to make handle animal checks to have his mount attack (because obviously, if you have to push your mount into attacking an abberation, you also have to handle it into attacking anyone) Plus, the way I (would like to) read it, it works more simple with the respective actions in combat: The ride check is free, so it can be made as part of a move&attck, full attack or charge. You do any of those 3 actions and roll ride, if you get the 10, you and your mount attack, if you fail, only one of you two can attack. Now, if making your mount attack the target costed an action (either move equivilent or full-round, depending on the tricks of your mount and the type of your target), that there would be a lot not working here (and without being able to proove it, I think they are supposed to work, and they have allways worked)
SauroGrenom 11-26-06, 01:25 PM	Most often the war-trained mounts have the defend trick and that automaticially triggers without any kind of action or skill check on the part of the rider. This is often the case in battles. Sometimes the HA check is missed, but it should be rolled if the mounted character is attacking with a warhorse and the defend trick has not been activated. Also most often the DC on the HA checks are impossible to fail unless the characters are low level. The way that I read the rules is that the attacking mounted character can use a ride check to get the chance to make a HA check for a free action and order his mount to attack as a free action. I'd modify your statement at follows: The ride check is free, so it can be made as part of a move&attck, full attack or charge. You do any of those 3 actions and roll ride, if you get the 10, you get the chance to have a HA check as a free action to instruct the mount to attack, if you fail the ride check you can use a move action to instruct the mount to attack (not possible with a full attack or charge), if you fail the HA check the mount won't attack, and if the target has already attacked you then you don't need to use a HA check at all due to the Defend trick.
Maraxus 11-26-06, 01:35 PM	This sound good.
Abyssal Stalker 11-26-06, 01:41 PM	Most often the war-trained mounts have the defend trick and that automaticially triggers without any kind of action or skill check on the part of the rider. This is often the case in battles. Sometimes the HA check is missed, but it should be rolled if the mounted character is attacking with a warhorse and the defend trick has not been activated. Also most often the DC on the HA checks are impossible to fail unless the characters are low level. The way that I read the rules is that the attacking mounted character can use a ride check to get the chance to make a HA check for a free action and order his mount to attack as a free action. I'd modify your statement at follows: The ride check is free, so it can be made as part of a move&attck, full attack or charge. You do any of those 3 actions and roll ride, if you get the 10, you get the chance to have a HA check as a free action to instruct the mount to attack, if you fail the ride check you can use a move action to instruct the mount to attack (not possible with a full attack or charge), if you fail the HA check the mount won't attack, and if the target has already attacked you then you don't need to use a HA check at all due to the Defend trick. I think that this method is way too clumsy to be what the rules are supposed to be. To me it looks like mounted combat is supposed to handle a bit differently from normal animal handling. If you think about it this way: a mounted combatant is totally different from a caharacter with a wolf ally. The first two act as a single unit on the battlefield, while the other two act as separate units. When the mounted warrior attacks with his trained-for-combat warhorse, it isn't too hard to imagine that the horse has a pretty good clue that the orc they are charging at should be smashed. On the other hand, if you command your wolf ally to attack something on the battlefield, it needs special attention. This is actually pretty well cleared in the RotG articles. Fight Along with Your Mount: Make a DC 10 Ride check as a free action. If you succeed, you can direct your mount to attack a foe and you also can attack as well. See the section on attacking while mounted for details. If you fail this check, or don't bother to make it, either you or your mount can attack this turn, but not both of you. It seems quite obvious that no additional handle animal check is required. If the opponent would be a creature that the mount isn't trained to attack, then there should be a check. It would be like charging a wall, the mount wouldn't "attack" the obstacle. (It would be thinking: what the heck you are doing, you moron..?) Mounted combat is and should be covered with the appropriate skill (ride) and only exceptions should be taken care of with different skills (handle animal). Keep it simple. Edit: And don't make your own rules, use the existing. :)
Zelck 11-26-06, 01:43 PM	And in the middle of combat where there are people running around and you are running around, how do you propose that you are going to un-bundle 8 arrows with 2 hands and less than 3 seconds? I challange you to imagine 8 arrows wrapped into a bundle shaped like a javalin. Then unwrap that bundle in 3 seconds just before or after you hustle 30' in less than 3 seconds. Yea, you're right. So, it'd probably be a full-round action or a two-round action? There is a ML requirement for a Psi Warrior to know a power. If you cannot know a 2nd level power, then you cannot manifest one. The minimum ML for a PSI warrior to know Dissolving Weapon is ML4. At least that's what we've been using for a long time. Sorcerers and bards simly have arcane scrolls, not a seperate level for the spells they cast. If there are spells cast at a lower level by a bard than a wizard, then it is perfectly viable to buy a bard version of the scroll. Good point about arcane scrolls. Still, there's only a /level/ requirement for a Psi Warrior to know a power, not a manifester level requirement. Take a look at the following wordings, especially the bolded part: Powers Known A psychic warrior begins play knowing one psychic warrior power of your choice. Each time he achieves a new level, he unlocks the knowledge of a new power. Choose the powers known from the psychic warrior power list. (Exception: The feats Expanded Knowledge and Epic Expanded Knowledge do allow a psychic warrior to learn powers from the lists of other classes.) A psychic warrior can manifest any power that has a power point cost equal to or lower than his manifester level. The total number of powers a psychic warrior can manifest in a day is limited only by his daily power points. A psychic warrior simply knows his powers; they are ingrained in his mind. He does not need to prepare them (in the way that some spellcasters prepare their spells), though he must get a good night’s sleep each day to regain all his spent power points. The Difficulty Class for saving throws against psychic warrior powers is 10 + the power’s level + the psychic warrior’s Wisdom modifier. Beginning at 2nd level, a slayer gains additional power points per day and access to new powers as if she had also gained a level in whatever manifesting class she belonged to before she added the prestige class. She does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained (bonus feats, metapsionic or item creation feats, psicrystal special abilities, and so on). This essentially means that she adds the level of slayer to the level of whatever manifesting class the character has, then determines power points per day, powers known, and manifester level accordingly. If a character had more than one manifesting class before she became a slayer, she must decide to which class she adds the new level of slayer for the purpose of determining power points per day, powers known, and manifester level. If the character did not belong to a manifesting class before taking this prestige class, she does not gain manifesting levels. There's no mention of manifester level being tied to powers known, and the only mention of manifester level and powers manifestable is that manifester level has to be greater than or equal to total power point cost. Finally, we have: You can manifest a power at a lower manifester level than normal, but the manifester level must be high enough for you to manifest the power in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same manifester level. So a Psychic Warrior should be able to make a ML3 powerstone for a second level power.
Maraxus 11-26-06, 03:45 PM	Abyssal Stalker: Okay, hey, I didn't know that the rules of the game even said it that clearly. So, how exactly would you manage the handle animal check, if the mount was to charge a creature it is not trained to fight? Then "ride 10" and on sucess a free handle animal check? Or simply make handle animal check to push the animal and once it works, the mount can be used like against an animal it is trained to fight?
Abyssal Stalker 11-27-06, 01:32 AM	I think that the "push an animal" DC25 handle animal check should be done beforehand against the creature you are fighting with, IF you wish to use the method "fight with warhorse" DC10 ride check against that creature. I see it this way: you should get the mount to understand that the creature you are facing is an opponent that can be attacked. Once it understands this, then there is no problem fighting with the mount against that particular creature. Pushing a creature to do something is a full round action, and should require extra attention from the character performing the check. Giving it free with the DC10 ride check feels way too overpowered, so I feel like it should be done beforehand. But I am not an elder, so the official ruling at the moment is Sauro's - I'm just argueing it. :)
MindWandererB 11-27-06, 01:57 PM	I agree with Sauro on everything except the PsiWar-only minimum manifester level. I agree with Zelck's logic on that one 100%. NiQil, would you do the honors of adding all the items on which we have consensus to the court decisions? The Efficient Quiver and Psionic Hole are pretty clear. I'm not sure Gaseous Form needs a ruling, since it's pretty straightforward. Alter Self: I certainly don't want to see wands of Alter Self usable to create any form. And there's little reason to allow staffs and psicrowns, if wands aren't allowed.
hogarth 11-27-06, 02:02 PM	Alter Self: I certainly don't want to see wands of Alter Self usable to create any form. Why not? You would be investing 4500 gp (and some credits as well) in order to change into a fairly limited number of creatures (with 3 HD or fewer). How is that overpowering? At any rate, the rules just say "expendables", so barring a further rules change I think it should apply to expendables only.
Zelck 11-28-06, 06:14 PM	Can you snipe with a spell-like ability, spell, or power? What if the SLA/spell/power is a ray or some other form of a ranged attack?
MindWandererB 11-28-06, 06:20 PM	Can you snipe with a spell-like ability, spell, or power? What if the SLA/spell/power is a ray or some other form of a ranged attack? I just answered this in the Tavern a few minutes ago... You can "snipe" with any offensive, standard action. Area effects follow the same rules, but you may not necessarily have to establish LOS to hit the target in the area, and in that case there is obviously no chance to be spotted.
McJarvis 11-28-06, 09:40 PM	Spell Trigger: (snip) No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. (snip) Note that it does not say or imply that the word spoken is a part of casting the spell. Thus comes the question: Can you whisper that word to activate spell-trigger items? The listen section of the SRD lists the DC for hearing a whisper as DC 15. (rather than DC 0 for people talking) This is, of course, primarily important to me for sniping reasons :)
Vathelokai 11-28-06, 09:52 PM	Note that it does not say or imply that the word spoken is a part of casting the spell. Thus comes the question: Can you whisper that word to activate spell-trigger items? The listen section of the SRD lists the DC for hearing a whisper as DC 15. (rather than DC 0 for people talking) This is, of course, primarily important to me for sniping reasons :) Here's my take on it: -Spells with a verbal component require a 'strong voice'; i.e. DC 0 to hear. -Scrolls are defined as being 'just like a spell', thus, they need a strong voice. -Wands are defined as being just like a scroll. It also uses the word speak or spoke in the description, just like spells and wands. Thus I would assume that activating a wand has to be in a strong, DC 0, voice. Verbal (V) A verbal component is a spoken incantation. To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice. To cast a spell, you must be able to speak (if the spell has a verbal component), gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any). Additionally, you must concentrate to cast a spell. A scroll is a spell that is mostly finished. The preparation is done for the caster, so no preparation time is needed beforehand as with normal spellcasting. All that’s left to do is perform the finishing parts of the spellcasting (the final gestures, words, and so on). Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. As for the next question (can I get a wand with silence) I shall repeat myself from the tavern. Any magic item or spell can be metamagiced to the point of having no components. This make it effectively a command thought item. However, wands specificly state in the item description that they have a vocal trigger. I would assume this superceeds a silence metamagic on the spell stored in it. But, any other item in the game can be silenced. For example, silent scrolls are completely allowed, since their description says they have the components of the base spell, and not a seperate set like wands do. -Guildmaster TAO ;)
McJarvis 11-28-06, 09:55 PM	Here's my take on it: -Spells with a verbal component require a 'strong voice'; i.e. DC 0 to hear. -Scrolls are defined as being 'just like a spell', thus, they need a strong voice. -Wands are defined as being just like a scroll. It also uses the word speak or spoke in the description, just like spells and wands. But those are the facts I'm using to support that wands can be whispered for. They are specifically defined as "not completing a spell" & only require knowledge of the spell & uttering the single command word(that doesn't have to have anything to do with the spell-> a wand-crafter could make the word "bullocks" if they wanted, from my reading) And for the record, Wands are not "just like a scroll", they are "similar" but much more simple.
Vathelokai 11-28-06, 09:58 PM	And for the record, Wands are not "just like a scroll", they are "similar" but much more simple.Touche :) The thrust of my arguement is that it says speak/spoke in the description of spells, and also in the description of wands. I see nothing to imply that you could speak differently, but I do see it implied that all spell casting must be done with a strong voice.
McJarvis 11-28-06, 10:00 PM	Touche :) The thrust of my arguement is that it says speak/spoke in the description of spells, and also in the description of wands. I see nothing to imply that you could speak differently, but I do see it implied that all spell casting must be done with a strong voice. But there is a definition that activating a wand is not spellcasting, thus there is no precidence in the rules about whether or not you can whisper the command word for a spell-trigger item. (since the wand is not considered actually casting the spell, rules for casting spells should not apply. Example: Grappling) Since it isn't specified or implied that you can't, I think you should be able to. At the standard DC provided in the SRD.
MindWandererB 11-28-06, 10:03 PM	But there is a definition that activating a wand is not spellcasting, thus there is no precidence in the rules about whether or not you can whisper the command word for a spell-trigger item. (since the wand is not considered actually casting the spell, rules for casting spells should not apply. Example: Grappling) Since it isn't specified or implied that you can't, I think you should be able to. At the standard DC provided in the SRD. Problem is, we have exactly one quasi-explicit instruction about "spoken" as a game term, and thus, how loud such speech has to be. That instruction is "speak in a strong voice." Even though it isn't applied to wands, we need some kind of guideline (Yelling? Whispering? Sub-vocal murmuring?), and "strong voice" is the only thing we have that isn't completely arbitrary.
Vathelokai 11-28-06, 10:06 PM	Alter Self: I certainly don't want to see wands of Alter Self usable to create any form. And there's little reason to allow staffs and psicrowns, if wands aren't allowed. As mentioned above, It's not currently against the rules. I'd just like to have a ruling either way (preferably a vote; I'm willing to wait). Firstly because it effects one of my characters, and secondly because it has the potential to create an additional house rule.
McJarvis 11-28-06, 10:07 PM	Problem is, we have exactly one quasi-explicit instruction about "spoken" as a game term, and thus, how loud such speech has to be. That instruction is "speak in a strong voice." Even though it isn't applied to wands, we need some kind of guideline (Yelling? Whispering? Sub-vocal murmuring?), and "strong voice" is the only thing we have that isn't completely arbitrary. Does it help that a DC 15 listen check for whispering is a solid SRD-certified listen check? I would say "Murmuring isn't listed, & thus would be a house rule".-> thus no murmering. This listen DC would only apply to things that must be spoken but do not have to be spoken in a "strong voice" -> and I think the rules are clear enough that this is in no way a house-rule. In the past(listen DC for hiding attackers) we've used the idea that if it isn't listed in the SRD DC tables it would just be a houserule. Since whispering is listed-> not a house-rule
SauroGrenom 11-30-06, 04:33 PM	I have three psionics related questions I'd like to have official answers for. 1) Can Overchannel be used to increase ML on psi-like abilities? 2) If arrows are used in conjunction with Telekinetic Thrust, then are they destroyed as if they were fired from a bow? 3) Do items that influince "spell casting ability" also influince powers due to the psionics/magic transparency. For example can a rod of extend spell be used to extend a psionic power? Or will a robe of the arch magi give a bonus on ML checks to penetrate PR? Or will an Orange Ioun stone give a +1ML as well as a +1 CL?
DSugui 11-30-06, 10:54 PM	Since I saw this twice in the last two weeks, I have to ask: Can Dissolving Weapon be manifested on a single arrow to be shot and receive the benefits of the power?
NiQil 11-30-06, 10:58 PM	Since I saw this twice in the last two weeks, I have to ask: Can Dissolving Weapon be manifested on a single arrow to be shot and receive the benefits of the power? Yes. You can't manifest it on the bow, because the power does not state that it tranfers to ammunition, so to use it with a ranged weapon, it must be manifested on the arrow itself. The power does not state that the effects go away if the weapon you put it on is no longer held, only that it has to be manifested on a held weapon. So holding the arrow, manifesting the power, and then firing the powered-up arrow is fine.
hogarth 12-01-06, 03:51 PM	This was discussed in the Tavern, but I'd like to get an official Elder opinion on the issue. Do cohorts have their own 3-fight cycle, or do they share one with their master? E.g. if a spellcasting cohort stays at home during the first two fights of her master's cycle but is brought to the third fight, can she use all of her spell levels during that fight (since it's fight #3 for the master, even though it's her first time fighting)?
MindWandererB 12-01-06, 03:55 PM	This was discussed in the Tavern, but I'd like to get an official Elder opinion on the issue. Do cohorts have their own 3-fight cycle, or do they share one with their master? E.g. if a spellcasting cohort stays at home during the first two fights of her master's cycle but is brought to the third fight, can she use all of her spell levels during that fight (since it's fight #3 for the master, even though it's her first time fighting)? At this time, they do not have seperate cycles. If someone begins to abuse this, we may need to change that.
Vathelokai 12-01-06, 07:50 PM	At this time, they do not have seperate cycles. If someone begins to abuse this, we may need to change that. Well, I plan to abuse it. When Zodiac gets circle magic from the red wizard prestige class and the leadership feat, he's going to be doing a lot of circle magic, and it would be quite unfair to allow his cohort to show up in fight 2 with a full complement of spells. On the same topic, if you circle magic your spells, does the cohort that donated the spell slots count as an ally for all fights in your cycle? Only fights where you use the circle spells? only on the first fight? Never?
MindWandererB 12-01-06, 08:08 PM	Well, I plan to abuse it. When Zodiac gets circle magic from the red wizard prestige class and the leadership feat, he's going to be doing a lot of circle magic, and it would be quite unfair to allow his cohort to show up in fight 2 with a full complement of spells.<sigh> Then this needs to go to the Council for an official rule change.
Vathelokai 12-02-06, 08:31 AM	Well, I have my ruling on alter self... not happy, but at least it's official... Was considering a ring of alter self. Would it have to have one fixed form, or could you change the form by taking the ring off and putting it back on (similar to 'restarting' a ring of invisibility by the same method)? Like a scroll, it needs to be fixed to one form. I'm aware that this is a coco houserule.
McJarvis 12-02-06, 03:53 PM	Can you use Use Magic Device to activate a staff? If so, what is the caster level of the activated effect? My thoughts on this is your UMD-20 check, then a hard cap of your ECL to avoid abuse. (Anyone ever hear the one about the Rogue who maxed out UMD and went around with a staff of blasphemy/or/hold word? Wait...that wasn't a joke... ;) )
SauroGrenom 12-03-06, 03:51 PM	Can you use Use Magic Device to activate a staff? If so, what is the caster level of the activated effect? My thoughts on this is your UMD-20 check, then a hard cap of your ECL to avoid abuse. (Anyone ever hear the one about the Rogue who maxed out UMD and went around with a staff of blasphemy/or/hold word? Wait...that wasn't a joke... ;) )The CL of a staff used in this way is the default CL of the staff. There is no ability in the UMD skill to emulate a specific CL. So you cannot do it at all. Using a staff with CL8 to cast a fireball spell will result in a 8d6 fireball with a save DC of 14 (unless your own INT bonus is +2 or higher). The UMD check for this should be a DC 20 check.
McJarvis 12-03-06, 04:01 PM	nevermind
MindWandererB 12-03-06, 04:05 PM	...but if you're going to go strictly by the rules, then UMD can't activate staffs at all. Staffs always use the caster level of the person using them. UMD has no specific language for activating staffs at all-> so either UMD can use staffs & we need a house rule, or it can't use staffs. Wrong:Use a Wand: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand’s spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill also applies to other spell trigger magic items, such as staffs.Sauro is 100% correct.
McJarvis 12-03-06, 04:06 PM	yeah...found that about 3 secs after I posted. Hence the edit :)
McJarvis 12-04-06, 11:14 AM	Hi :) Do monsters that advance by class level always increase their SR by 1/level? I can't find any entries that do not do this....though the monsters without a "So-and-so-Monsters as Characters" section do not specify this exactly. A good example, I suppose, would be the Chain Devil. Starts off with SR 18 & there is no "Chain Devil's as characters" section, despite the LA being listed for the monster.
SauroGrenom 12-04-06, 12:14 PM	The SR increases with class level or HD only if it's specificially stated that it does so.
Gonbow 12-04-06, 11:51 PM	Tatyana leveled up in her last battle and I'm looking at what new nifty powers to pick up, so I've got some questions. 1. Can Psionic Dimension Door (Or Dimension Door, for that matter) be used in conjunction with a 'Ready' to avoid things? (I.E: If I see em start casting, get out of there. Or: When he attacks me, dimension door away defensively) I've always been slightly muddled about what we don't allow readies to do and not, so I want to double check if this is allowed or not. 2. Does Control Air stack with itself? I.E: If one psion manifests control air to increase the wind by the maximum amount, say from 0 to 60. Then another psion manifests Control Air on the same area to also increase the windspeed, would the net speed be 120 (stacking) 60 (No effect from second manifestation) or...?
Zevox 12-04-06, 11:58 PM	1. Can Psionic Dimension Door (Or Dimension Door, for that matter) be used in conjunction with a 'Ready' to avoid things? (I.E: If I see em start casting, get out of there. Or: When he attacks me, dimension door away defensively) I've always been slightly muddled about what we don't allow readies to do and not, so I want to double check if this is allowed or not. Nope. Check the rules again - the wording was cleared up a bit. You cannot ready an action to "negate an attack by avoidance." Obviously, this qualifies. Zevox
SauroGrenom 12-05-06, 12:27 AM	2. Does Control Air stack with itself? I.E: If one psion manifests control air to increase the wind by the maximum amount, say from 0 to 60. Then another psion manifests Control Air on the same area to also increase the windspeed, would the net speed be 120 (stacking) 60 (No effect from second manifestation) or...? Spell effects like this typicially don't stack. They overlap. I'd use that as the rule in this situation.
TheMagister 12-05-06, 03:30 AM	Please read entirely before voting. Thanks in advance for your patience and participation. Points: A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons (such as the magic fang and magic weapon spells). A monk’s hand can be considered both a hand and a manufactured weapon. The pyrokineticist class ability, Hand Afire, targets one of the Pyro’s hands, and allows attacks with that hand to deal an extra 2d6 points of fire damage. The pyro class ability, Weapon Afire, targets one weapon the pyro holds, and causes hits with that weapon to deal an extra 2d6 points of fire damage. The pyro class ability, Nimbus, engulfs the pyro’s entire body with flames, and allows a touch attack for 2d6 points of fire damage. A monk’s hand is a part of his body, and so would be affected by the Nimbus ability. Melee touch attacks can be delivered via an unarmed strike, as long as the attacker is willing to roll a normal unarmed attack against the targets full Armor Class (per FAQ). If the attacker does not have Improved Unarmed Strike, this attack would provoke an AoO from an armed target that threatens the attacker. The Psionic power Dissolving Weapon directly references the Psionic power Dissolving Touch, and thus render each other non-stackable as they are to be considered the same power. None of the Pyro’s class abilities follow the above precedent. In fact, the 8th level class ability Greater Weapon Afire specifically uses the “or” clarifier while discussing the improvement of each of the separate abilities. The FAQ states that the Pyro’s Fire Lash, which deals 1d8 fire damage, can be affected and improved by the Pyro’s Weapon Afire ability, setting a precedent that states that multiple non-related incidences of energy damage applied to the same weapon stack. Niqil agrees that Hand Afire and Weapon Afire do stack. “Holding” and “Wielding” are two different things. MWB would support the stacking of the Pyro’s abilities if I can satisfactorily answer why they do but Psionic Fist and Psionic Weapon have been ruled not to. MWB would disagree with any ruling on monk unarmed strikes being ineligible targets for the Psionic power Dissolving Weapon. @MWB - The feats Psionic Fist and Psionic Weapon “probably” do not stack because of the restriction placed upon the expenditure of Psionic Foci to “amp damage on the same weapon/attack”. The Sage could certainly see this being allowed in certain situations, but leaves the decision up to the DM. However, this is entirely separate from this discussion, as this discussion does not involve Psionic Foci, but class abilities. On the stacking of like energy types: If these energy types were different, say, fire and lightning, would you still have a problem? Q: What is the advantage in the same element stacking compared to separate elements stacking? A: there isn’t one. The stacking of the different elements is actually stronger, since a creature that is resistant or immune to one element would still take damage from the other. A creature that is immune to the element in question would take none. There is nothing “overpowering” about the stacking of the same type of elemental damage. @Niqil – All I can say is that it is non-sensical to say that a monk does not “wield” her unarmed strike. If she does not, then she doesn’t fit the criteria for threatening the area around her, since a weaponless character does not threaten. A monk is never considered weaponless (unless unconscious or held immobile or pinned). It is non-sensical to be claimed to be considered to be “wielding” a weapon without also being considered to be “holding” it as well (without magic, see: telekinesis). For example: is a gauntlet a “held weapon”? Technically, it is a “worn” weapon, otherwise how can a weapon be used to “hold” a weapon (in the case of a gauntleted character holding a longsword)? If a pyrokineticist is equipped with a gauntlet, is that gauntlet ineligible to receive the Weapon Afire ability without they pyro first removing the gauntlet and holding it in her hands? Of course not, to suggest such a convoluted requirement is needlessly complicated. It is also needlessly complicated to claim that a monk does not “wield” a weapon when she attacks with her unarmed strike. Taking the next step and treating her unarmed strike as a “held” weapon is both logical and game mechanically friendly. … On a totally un-RAW note, monks quite frankly need all the helps and advantages they can get. And that’s what I’ve got. Please vote after careful consideration and not with a gut reaction. Be impartial judges; that’s all I ask.
MindWandererB 12-05-06, 03:43 AM	@MWB - The feats Psionic Fist and Psionic Weapon “probably” do not stack because of the restriction placed upon the expenditure of Psionic Foci to “amp damage on the same weapon/attack”. The Sage could certainly see this being allowed in certain situations, but leaves the decision up to the DM. However, this is entirely separate from this discussion, as this discussion does not involve Psionic Foci, but class abilities. On the stacking of like energy types: If these energy types were different, say, fire and lightning, would you still have a problem? Q: What is the advantage in the same element stacking compared to separate elements stacking? A: there isn’t one. The stacking of the different elements is actually stronger, since a creature that is resistant or immune to one element would still take damage from the other. A creature that is immune to the element in question would take none. There is nothing “overpowering” about the stacking of the same type of elemental damage.In my opinion, the Psionic Focus portion is a red herring. Although foci were specifically mentioned, I don't believe the rule was meant to be applied to them specifically. Rather, I am of the opinion that any abilities that are identical in all respects except for what qualifies as a legal target or modality do not stack. For instance, I would not allow Claw of Energy and Weapon of Energy to stack, even if you somehow managed to get a claw to be treated as a manufactured weapon. I agree about the energy type bit; I think you could have a weapon with the Flaming property, the Weapon of Energy (fire) power, and the pyro Weapon Afire ability running all at once, and they would stack.
TelinArtho 12-05-06, 09:32 AM	@TM - I'm just going to vote here, in favor of saying that Weapon Afire and Hand Afire do not stack - but would rather overlap in the rare cases where they could.
NiQil 12-05-06, 10:07 AM	And let me go ahead and reiterate my vote that Weapon Afire cannot be applied to an unarmed strike, because an unarmed strike (or a natural weapon, as it would fall in the same category), is not a held weapon. So no, no Weapon Afire applied to monk unarmed strikes.
spasheridan 12-05-06, 01:48 PM	I thought I read somewhere that all cohorts require a quest - even for a thrall. Unless otherwise noted the character must go on a Quest to acquire a class ally. Class feature allies use the 25 pt buy to determine ability scores if they have a LA listed (planar cohort, thrall), else, if the ally has no LA (paladin mount, wizard familiar, etc) it uses the abilities presented in their entry, modified by whatever bonus it gets from being a class ally. Does "otherwise noted" mean since it says 24 hours in class description I just get it? I had argued that point many moons ago but was told that a quest was required...
hogarth 12-05-06, 01:53 PM	I have a question about a hunter fight. In this fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=10807801#post10807801), Reginald's ally knocked Torel to negative hit points, and then later in the same round Torel's ally killed Reginald! (A close fight indeed!) The Rules state: You may attack any Character but you will only get rewards for defeated* targets. [..] *Definition 'defeated': target is dead, unconscious, or helpless with no chance to rejoin on its own. To receive rewards this state must still apply at the end of the fight. If your target gets anyhow revived again during the fight, you get your original target reassigned and no target rewards until it is defeated (again). 1) Is Torel the last man standing? He went unconscious (but not dead) before Reginald died. [My understanding is that Torel should get the credit for being the last man standing since he was only dying, not dead.] 2) Does Reginald get credit for having "defeated" a target? [It looks like he might, but it's not totally clear!] Edit: Ideally I hope I can have this cleared up by the character editing deadline tomorrow, but that's probably not going to happen. :(
MindWandererB 12-05-06, 02:31 PM	I have a question about a hunter fight. In this fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=10807801#post10807801), Reginald's ally knocked Torel to negative hit points, and then later in the same round Torel's ally killed Reginald! (A close fight indeed!) The Rules state: 1) Is Torel the last man standing? He went unconscious (but not dead) before Reginald died. [My understanding is that Torel should get the credit for being the last man standing since he was only dying, not dead.] 2) Does Reginald get credit for having defeated a target? [It looks like he might, but it's not totally clear!] Edit: Ideally I hope I can have this cleared up by the character editing deadline tomorrow, but that's probably not going to happen. :( Order of defeat is all that matters in a Hunter fight. Kervan went down when he was Torel's target, so Torel gets the credit. So Torel gets Winner+Loser+Loser, and the others just get Loser. Hold on, I need to check. Edit: I think I was right the first time. Up until the end, the "defeated" definition applies. To determine the "last man standing," it's time of death that applies, by tradition, at least. I can't find anything in the rules about whether it's death or "defeat" that applies in a 1-on-1 battle, but death is what's been used as far as I've seen.
hogarth 12-05-06, 02:44 PM	I seem to recall that NiQil argued in a hunter battle involving one of his Horseman characters that once all enemies were unconscious, the battle should end instantly (whether the enemy still has allies or not). By that criterion, Reg would have been the last man standing (barely). That "defeated" wording (with the footnote) is quite strange though; it doesn't state whether that applies to all battles or just hunter battles or what. Edit: I think I was right the first time. Up until the end, the "defeated" definition applies. To determine the "last man standing," it's time of death that applies, by tradition, at least. I can't find anything in the rules about whether it's death or "defeat" that applies in a 1-on-1 battle, but death is what's been used as far as I've seen.
MindWandererB 12-05-06, 02:50 PM	I seem to recall that NiQil argued in a hunter battle involving one of his Horseman battles that once all enemies were unconscious, the battle should end instantly (whether the enemy still has allies or not). By that criterion, Reg would have been the last man standing (barely). That "defeated" wording (with the footnote) is quite strange though; it doesn't state whether that applies to all battles or just hunter battles or what. That footnote clearly applies to only Hunter and FFA battles; what's unclear to me is whether it applies when the fight is down to 2 participants.
DSugui 12-05-06, 02:52 PM	As pitlord, I consider a gladiator "defeated" if he falls unconsious and has no means to regain consciousness or allies to fight for him. Death is used as a tiebreaker. In the fight in question, I would consider Torel the winner (his ally could still fight for him, so he is not still defeated). Also, I have seen fights were the gladiator is unconscious and the ally keeps fighting for rounds and rounds, until one of the gladiators is dead (or the ally is knocked out).
hogarth 12-05-06, 04:59 PM	As pitlord, I consider a gladiator "defeated" if he falls unconsious and has no means to regain consciousness or allies to fight for him. Death is used as a tiebreaker. In the fight in question, I would consider Torel the winner (his ally could still fight for him, so he is not still defeated). Note that Reg still had an ally who could fight for him, too (his psicrystal can fire sonic Acid Splashes from a magic ring). Also, I have seen fights were the gladiator is unconscious and the ally keeps fighting for rounds and rounds, until one of the gladiators is dead (or the ally is knocked out). The question is "Are Hunter fights supposed to have a different definition of 'defeated' than other fights?" Note that each gladiator has a claim (sort of) to being the "last man standing" in this case: Kervan -- last man not dead/dying (he was only knocked out via nonlethal grapple damage) Torel -- last man alive with an ally who can still fight for him Reginald -- last man to fall unconscious ----------- On an unrelated note, does anyone know if Pittbull is still around?
NiQil 12-05-06, 05:12 PM	Alright....I reviewed the fight you guys want a ruling on. Let me first quote the rules for hunter fights. Hunter Fights: These work similar to All vs All Fights with the difference that every character has a target assigned. The number of gladiators is either 3 or 4. Rules: In a Hunter Fight, everyone has a target which is determined by the order characters are listed in the Pairings Post: A -> B -> C -> D -> A. You may attack any Character but you will only get rewards for defeatedx targets. Once you have defeated your target, you will immedeately and automatically get your target's target. Rewards are based on Last Man Standing and the number of defeated targets: Last Man Standing gains Winner rewards, plus 1 loser rewards for every target defeated. All others gain Loser rewards, plus 1 loser rewards for every target defeated. Power-Rating Calculation: Base PR of Defeated Target/Character*100 (each individually) minus (if killed) Character/Hunter*100. xDefinition 'defeated': target is dead, unconscious, or helpless with no chance to rejoin on its own. To receive rewards this state must still apply at the end of the fight. If your target gets anyhow revived again during the fight, you get your original target reassigned and no target rewards until it is defeated (again). I bolded the important portion here, because Hunter fights have a different criteria for how "dead" is determined than the rest of our fight types do. As such, having reviewed the fight, the order of death as defined above, is : Kervan dies first Torel dies second Reginald wins. Regardless of what happened to Reginald after Torel was killed, as per the above definition, as soon as Torel was brought to death, the fight ended. The last attack on Reginald never occurred. Someone had mentioned that one of my characters had a similar circumstance happen to them, and they are correct. One of my Horsemen was in a Hunter match and dropped the final opponent, but later that round was killed by the final opponent's ally. Telin ran the fight and initially awarded the fight to the person who owned the ally, but later changed it after reading the definition of defeated as it relates to Hunter fights. So your order of finish is Reginald wins, Torel takes second, and Kervan brings up the rear. Rewards should be calculated using that order.
SauroGrenom 12-05-06, 06:38 PM	After thinking on this one for a while, I've decided that weapon of fire and hand of fire should stack for a monk. The key element for me is consideration of a gauntlet. Clearly such a weapon is held when it is being used. Also a gauntlet is considered to be an unarmed attack. It seams that since a gauntlet is an unarmed attack it would benefit from hand of fire, and since it is also a weapon it would benefit from weapon of fire. If a gauntlet is allowed to stack these two effects, then an unarmed strike should also be allowed to stack the two effects.
MindWandererB 12-05-06, 06:51 PM	If a gauntlet is allowed to stack these two effects, then an unarmed strike should also be allowed to stack the two effects.Agreed. But I have different reasons for not allowing them to stack, on a gauntlet or on anything else.
TheMagister 12-05-06, 07:02 PM	In my opinion, the Psionic Focus portion is a red herring. Although foci were specifically mentioned, I don't believe the rule was meant to be applied to them specifically. And the "rule" isn't even a hard rule. It's left up to the DM. I do understand that you're a DM in this instance, but I wonder if you're basing your RAW decision on a very ambiguous answer that really doesn't have anything to do with the discussion at hand. That discussion being whether or not a pyro-monk's abilities are seperate or identical. Rather, I am of the opinion that any abilities that are identical in all respects except for what qualifies as a legal target or modality do not stack. For instance, I would not allow Claw of Energy and Weapon of Energy to stack, even if you somehow managed to get a claw to be treated as a manufactured weapon. I agree about the energy type bit; I think you could have a weapon with the Flaming property, the Weapon of Energy (fire) power, and the pyro Weapon Afire ability running all at once, and they would stack. Gonbow made an excellent observation in the Tavern discussion...lemme go dig it up. TM's argument is pretty solid. Weapon Afire and Hand Afire are not the same thing. They are similar to each-other, but if they had appear in disparate places, no one would claim they are the same. It is only because they are right next to each-other that this claim is raised. Dissolving Weapon & Touch on the other hand, would not be the same, except that they specifically say that they are. Weapon & Hand Afire do no such thing. Yes, it's a technicality, but everything in D&D is a technicality. RAI, they are supposed to affect different things. RAW, they overlap alot. I.E: Monks and anyone with natural weapons. He makes a good point in that if they had appeared in different places, then no one would have a problem with them stacking. What I'm saying is that Weapon of Energy (fire) and Weapon Afire have more in common than Hand Afire and Weapon Afire do. It's simply that the two abilites appear in the same class description and (with the inclusion of the monk class into the mix) happen to affect the same target (the hand/unarmed strike) which wears two hats at the same time. Please reconsider.It's true that they had appeared in different places, they would stack. That would be because an important common feature would have been removed: the fact that they are class features of the same class. I don't agree that Weapon of Energy (fire) and Weapon Afire have more in common than Hand Afire and Weapon Afire do. Hand Afire and Weapon Afire are different only in the target they can affect. Weapon of Energy (fire) and Weapon Afire are different in the class that grants the ability, the cost of activating the ability, the type of ability (Psi-Like vs. an actual power), the duration, the amount of damage dealt, and the crit-burst effect. Any one of those differences, IMO, would be adequate to allow them to stack (except perhaps the psi-like vs. power distinction, and that would depend on the phrasing). On a similar note, I would allow Hand Afire and Nimbus to stack, if you opted to deliver the touch attack with an unarmed strike. The mechanics are fundamentally different (duration, uses per day, and all of Nimbus' rider effects). Done.
MindWandererB 12-05-06, 07:07 PM	Sure.
DSugui 12-05-06, 07:54 PM	This discussion came up in the Tavern last week, but there was no conclusion. It would be nice to have an official ruling. Do animal companions, familiars, psicrystals, etc. get +1 ability every 4 HD (beyond those described in their respective entries)?
NiQil 12-05-06, 08:51 PM	This discussion came up in the Tavern last week, but there was no conclusion. It would be nice to have an official ruling. Do animal companions, familiars, psicrystals, etc. get +1 ability every 4 HD (beyond those described in their respective entries)? From the Court Decisions: Q: When advancing class allies, such as the druid or ranger animal companions, do they receive the ability bonus at 4 HD like PC's? A: Any creature that has it's own hit dice receives this bonus at the appropriate HD increment. Familiars and other things who do not advance using their own hit dice, do not receive this bonus.
hogarth 12-06-06, 08:33 AM	I have a question about a hunter fight. In this fight (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=10807801#post10807801), Reginald's ally knocked Torel to negative hit points, and then later in the same round Torel's ally killed Reginald! (A close fight indeed!) 1) Is Torel the last man standing? He went unconscious (but not dead) before Reginald died. [My understanding is that Torel should get the credit for being the last man standing since he was only dying, not dead.] 2) Does Reginald get credit for having "defeated" a target? [It looks like he might, but it's not totally clear!] So far we have two three votes from Elders. MWB: The Hunter fight has separate rules for "defeating" an opponent. These apply until there are two gladiators remaining, in which case standard knock-out rules apply to determine the "last man standing" (i.e., a gladiator is not defeated until she is dead, not just dying, helpless or unconscious). Thus Torel is the winner and gets credit for defeating two opponents. NiQil: The Hunter fight has separate rules for "defeating" an opponent, and these apply until the end of the match -- no exceptions. It doesn't matter if that opponent still has allies who can fight; once a gladiator is "defeated" (i.e. dead, dying, helpless or unconscious with no way of removing that condition), he and his allies are out of the fight. Thus Reg is the winner (with credit for defeating one opponent) and Torel gets credit for defeating one opponent. SauroGrenom: Agrees with NiQil. Sauro and Telin (and Pittbull), could you add your opinions as well?
NiQil 12-06-06, 09:56 AM	So far we have two votes from Elders. MWB: The Hunter fight has separate rules for "defeating" an opponent. These apply until there are two gladiators remaining, in which case standard knock-out rules apply to determine the "last man standing" (i.e., a gladiator is not defeated until she is dead, not just dying, helpless or unconscious). Thus Torel is the winner and gets credit for defeating two opponents. NiQil: The Hunter fight has separate rules for "defeating" an opponent, and these apply until the end of the match -- no exceptions. It doesn't matter if that opponent still has allies who can fight; once a gladiator is "defeated" (i.e. dead, dying, helpless or unconscious with no way of removing that condition), he and his allies are out of the fight. Thus Reg is the winner (with credit for defeating one opponent) and Torel gets credit for defeating one opponent. Sauro and Telin (and Pittbull), could you add your opinions as well? MWB is incorrect in this regards, as his interpretation is not listed anywhere in the Hunter rules, which has different rules for defeat than any other match we have. To support my argument, I provide this fight, involving one of my old characters. At the end of the fight, Igg Scalari knocked Ghashara into negative HP, but Ghashara still had allies available to fight. In the original run of the fight, the allies killed Igg before Ghashara bled out. However, once the Hunter rules for death were pointed out to the pitlord, TelinArtho, the result was changed to reflect Igg as the winner. This can all be seen at the end of the fight and in the fight results. The reason that the Hunter fight has these seperate rules is for exactly this reason. When the hunter fights were introduced way back when, myself and others argued about the possibility of not getting credit for killing someone simply because you got killed before the unconscious person bled out. These Hunter fight rules were created so that there are clear cut determinations as to when someone is "dead".
SauroGrenom 12-06-06, 10:00 AM	I agree with NiQil on this one. I'd like to remind everyone about the rules regarding attacking allies after a battle is done. For example it's not allowed to go and kill someone's horse after the rider has fallen unconcious. Those prohibitions should still apply in hunter fights to protect allies from sone kinds of abuse. I think this means that once the main character is out of the fight, that the allies associated with that character are also out of the fight.
hogarth 12-06-06, 10:05 AM	I agree with NiQil on this one. Opinion added to the summary post above.
Erithmu 12-06-06, 10:17 AM	I think you also got Telin's opinion on the matter with his change of the fight. That would be 4 of the elders, I think a minor clarification of rules would be in order.
TelinArtho 12-06-06, 11:39 AM	Yes - I also agree with NiQil.
MindWandererB 12-06-06, 06:44 PM	Yes - I also agree with NiQil. <shrug> My opinion wasn't very strong anyway. Although I do find it a bit odd.
McJarvis 12-09-06, 01:37 PM	I already got MWB's position on this via IM, but I want to make sure.... regarding listen checks for spells: Let's say a hypothetical goblin is casting scorching ray. That's a DC 0 listen check to hear him cast it, a DC 20 listen check to pinpoint him. If the Goblin uses a metamagic rod of silence spell, what happens? 1) DC 0 listen check for him attacking 2) No listen check, since it's a silent spell. MWB says...(paraphrase) When you cast Scorching Ray, there are actually two Listen DC's someone can hit. One is a DC 0 + distance mods listen DC for you casting the spell, the other is a DC 0 + distance mods listen DC for you attacking. Thus, then you silence the spell there is still a listen DC of 0. This does not seem...."good" to me though. Is he right? I feel like someone casting a silent spell would not have the same effective listen DC as someone casting a non-silent spell.
NiQil 12-09-06, 04:07 PM	After a conversation I had with Macbrea, I would like to set a DC for crafting normal, run of the mill arrows. Currently, there is no set DC for them, but it is something that is done by my own characters and possibly others that can do so and just never have before. After examining the Craft DC's, I am of the opinion that it should fall into the "Typical Item" category and be a DC 10 to craft normal arrows. I want to get some Elder opinions on this so that I can update the Court Decisions accordingly.
Macbrea 12-09-06, 04:10 PM	I was staring at the rules to allies I think we have been not charging those characters that use Summons monster or Summon's natures allies. They should be charged for each ally they summon's in to the arena and there is a limit to what they can summons. Spells, Powers, and Abilities: Certain spells and powers (Planar Ally, Animate Dead, Dominate, Animate Object, etc) or Abilities (Rebuke undead, etc) allow a character to summon, create allies, or control allies. These allies will always require a share of your XP and gold, and on top of that the regular xp and/or gold price for acquiring them in the first place, if any. In case of the Animate Dead spell you need to acquire a corpse first (which is normally be tied to a Quest or Miniquest unless you can get the body in another way, eg. buy a horse and kill it). All these allies use the abilities presented in their entry, modified by whatever the spell does (eg. +2 dex for skeletons). The Create Spawn ability of some undead creates minions who will use the unmodified MM entry and its CR to determine the CA. Special: a spellcaster may create a Homunkulus. Animate object is 1/round per level.
Macbrea 12-09-06, 04:28 PM	According to how that is written, with the limitation on maxCA you may bring into the arena. It means character which have tactics such as Kraegin's tactics last week may have an issue. Kraegin's tactic at ECL 9 were: Summon Monster V (Achaierai [CR 5]), Summon Monster III (Fienish Huge Centipede [CR 3]) x 2, Summon Monster II (Fiendish Large Centipede [CR 1]). Which is CA = 12. More then the maximum amount he may summon into the arena. This assume he doesn't recall any of the spells and summon more. Pitlords may need to watch out for such tactics and remember to penalize the people the 25%.
MindWandererB 12-09-06, 04:33 PM	I was staring at the rules to allies I think we have been not charging those characters that use Summons monster or Summon's natures allies. They should be charged for each ally they summon's in to the arena and there is a limit to what they can summons. Animate object is 1/round per level. That's certainly not the intention. Animate Object should perhaps be reexamined. It's impossible to prebuff, anyway. @NiQil: I'm torn between 10 and 12. I think a perfectly straight (thougn non-masterwork) arrow should be a little bit harder to make than an iron pot. 12 is the value for a bow and for a simple weapon; I don't think it should be any lower than that.
NiQil 12-09-06, 04:45 PM	That's certainly not the intention. Animate Object should perhaps be reexamined. It's impossible to prebuff, anyway. @NiQil: I'm torn between 10 and 12. I think a perfectly straight (thougn non-masterwork) arrow should be a little bit harder to make than an iron pot. 12 is the value for a bow and for a simple weapon; I don't think it should be any lower than that. I'm open to 12 as well...I was just trying to use an existing classification, rather than creating a new house rule for arrows. While we are at it, we should probably also make DC's for bullets and bolts...
Vathelokai 12-09-06, 04:56 PM	A creature with the summon ability can summon specific other creatures ... No experience points are awarded for summoned monsters. The SRD is pretty clear that summoned (short durration) creatures are factored into the CR of an encounter already. It should be noted that if summon X or animate object are put under the allies cap, then it would be counter to this general idea. A load of monsters on a map is a pain, admitedly, but putting another cap on magical power seems a bit much to me.
Vathelokai 12-09-06, 04:59 PM	I already got MWB's position on this via IM, but I want to make sure.... regarding listen checks for spells: Let's say a hypothetical goblin is casting scorching ray. That's a DC 0 listen check to hear him cast it, a DC 20 listen check to pinpoint him. If the Goblin uses a metamagic rod of silence spell, what happens? 1) DC 0 listen check for him attacking 2) No listen check, since it's a silent spell. MWB says...(paraphrase) This does not seem...."good" to me though. Is he right? I feel like someone casting a silent spell would not have the same effective listen DC as someone casting a non-silent spell. It dosn't seem good to me either. I'd like to see some SRD quotes to back it up when there's time.
Macbrea 12-09-06, 04:59 PM	My quote is straight out of the Allies section we have been playing with for awhile. It needs to be reevailuated if you intend for people to summon creatures at combat spells.
Vathelokai 12-09-06, 05:04 PM	My quote is straight out of the Allies section we have been playing with for awhile. It needs to be reevailuated if you intend for people to summon creatures at combat spells. My understanding was that it only applied to prebuffed allies.
Macbrea 12-09-06, 05:08 PM	If that is clear it needs to be written differently. They need to make a choice on wether summons/called/created allies count.
McJarvis 12-09-06, 07:34 PM	I'm open to 12 as well...I was just trying to use an existing classification, rather than creating a new house rule for arrows. While we are at it, we should probably also make DC's for bullets and bolts... Regular ammunition should just have the DC of its launcher. Regarding Animate Object: I told Mac this on IM, but I'm pretty sure that is referring to a perminancied animate object ;)
Vathelokai 12-09-06, 09:51 PM	If that is clear it needs to be written differently. They need to make a choice on wether summons/called/created allies count. Agreed. And if there is a cap on the number of allies in the fight at any point instead of allies you can bring to a fight, then my summoner is going to need some rebuilding/retiring. Regarding Animate Object: I told Mac this on IM, but I'm pretty sure that is referring to a perminancied animate object ;) I definitely agree that permenant animated objects count as regular allies.
Macbrea 12-12-06, 09:34 AM	Ok, not that I am arguing it from my fight. I could care less it did exactly the thing that I wanted it to do. That is show my opponent where I was in the forest. If a person casts Burning Hands on a Web spell is only the squares struck by the fire burned away or is the whole web lit ablaze and will burn 5ft per round until gone. Relavent quotes from SRD Burning Hands Flammable materials burn if the flames touch them. A character can extinguish burning items as a full-round action. Web Effect: Webs in a 20-ft.-radius spread The strands of a web spell are flammable. A magic flaming sword can slash them away as easily as a hand brushes away cobwebs. Any fire can set the webs alight and burn away 5 square feet in 1 round. All creatures within flaming webs take 2d4 points of fire damage from the flames.
Maraxus 12-13-06, 11:48 PM	Oh, great Oracle, tell me please: Does Touchside identify illousions in general and Mirror image in particular? You generate a subtle telekinetic field of mental contact, allowing you to “feel” your surroundings even in total darkness or when your sight would otherwise be obscured by your physical environment. Your touchsight field emanates from you out to 60 feet. You ignore invisibility, darkness, and concealment, though you must have line of effect to a creature or an object to discern it. You do not need to make Spot or Listen checks to notice creatures; you can detect and pinpoint all creatures within 60 feet. In many circumstances, comparing your regular senses to what you learn with touchsight is enough to tell you the difference between visible, invisible, hiding, and concealed creatures. Reason: The discription of Touchsight say nothing about being able to make out illusions as such. From the discripition of the ability "able to "feel" the surroundings", it would make sense, but D&D does not necessary make sense. Furthermore one could find explanations: We have allready decided that illusion spells do not simply alter the light but fool the minds of the observer. Therefor getting a new sense does would not save you. And to come to "Mirror image", it specificly says, that it fools sight and vision but does not say, that it is limited to those. I think RAW would say "Touchside does not help against illusions (except for those creating invisibility or concealment effects)", and I'm not even sure, this isn't RAI, too. But it's all not clearly enought, so I'd like to ask. :)
SauroGrenom 12-13-06, 11:49 PM	It is my understanding that touchsight defeats mirror image and illusions in general.
Macbrea 12-14-06, 12:07 AM	That isn't fully true. There are categories of illusions that you need to look at: Figments - A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. (It is not a personalized mental impression.) Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. Glamers - A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear. Patterns - Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. Phantasms - A phantasm spell creates a mental image that usually only the caster and the subject (or subjects) of the spell can perceive. This impression is totally in the minds of the subjects. Shadows - A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a shadow illusion is real. Mirror Image is a Figment. Touchsight probably makes you immune to it because your feeling the object and not looking at it. If it was a pattern though it would appear in the mind of the viewer and touchsight wouldn't have anything to do with it at all. It comes down to the person has to guess that it isn't real.
Vathelokai 12-14-06, 12:16 AM	You generate a subtle telekinetic field of mental contact, allowing you to “feel” your surroundings even in total darkness or when your sight would otherwise be obscured by your physical environment. Your touchsight field emanates from you out to 60 feet. You ignore invisibility, darkness, and concealment, though you must have line of effect to a creature or an object to discern it. You do not need to make Spot or Listen checks to notice creatures; you can detect and pinpoint all creatures within 60 feet. In many circumstances, comparing your regular senses to what you learn with touchsight is enough to tell you the difference between visible, invisible, hiding, and concealed creatures. Figment A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. (It is not a personalized mental impression.) Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can. If intelligible speech is possible, it must be in a language you can speak. If you try to duplicate a language you cannot speak, the image produces gibberish. Likewise, you cannot make a visual copy of something unless you know what it looks like. Because figments and glamers (see below) are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. They cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding or delaying foes, but useless for attacking them directly. A figment’s AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier. Glamer A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear. Pattern Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. All patterns are mind-affecting spells. Phantasm A phantasm spell creates a mental image that usually only the caster and the subject (or subjects) of the spell can perceive. This impression is totally in the minds of the subjects. It is a personalized mental impression. (It’s all in their heads and not a fake picture or something that they actually see.) Third parties viewing or studying the scene don’t notice the phantasm. All phantasms are mind-affecting spells. Shadow A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a shadow illusion is real. So pattern and phantasm illusions could bypass touchsight since they are mind altering. Shadows cannot because they are partly real (shadow conjurations are not invisible to touchsight). Glammers and Figments only have a 'touch' element if specificly stated in the spell (compare the glammers 'hallucinatory terrain' and 'mirage arcana'). These figments separate from you and remain in a cluster, each within 5 feet of at least one other figment or you. You can move into and through a mirror image. When you and the mirror image separate, observers can’t use vision or hearing to tell which one is you and which the image. being that it is a figment, and the spell description only says that it fools sight and sound, I would guess touchsight defeats it. Also, since it specificly says you can walk right through the image, I must assume it has no touch element. For most uses, touchsight defeats illusions below 5th level, and about half of the ones above it (or at least provides a favorable disbelief saving throw).
Erithmu 12-17-06, 12:21 AM	Question: Ability burn, as referenced in the Egoist/PW power 'psychofeedback', and Psi Feat 'Body Fuel'. Is that healed between fights, even though it can only be healed through natural means? Edit: Further note: If Ability burn is healed after a fight, this feat becomes abuseable, allowing a gladiator to recover a chunk of pp. In my current ECL 3 fight, the gladiator will recover all of his pp that was used, and will be able to do it again in the next week.
NiQil 12-17-06, 12:09 PM	Question: Ability burn, as referenced in the Egoist/PW power 'psychofeedback', and Psi Feat 'Body Fuel'. Is that healed between fights, even though it can only be healed through natural means? Edit: Further note: If Ability burn is healed after a fight, this feat becomes abuseable, allowing a gladiator to recover a chunk of pp. In my current ECL 3 fight, the gladiator will recover all of his pp that was used, and will be able to do it again in the next week. Alright...let me dig into this one and see if I don't make a mess of it. BODY FUEL [PSIONIC] You can expand your power point total at the expense of your health. Benefit: You can recover 2 power points by taking 1 point of ability burn damage to each of your three ability scores: Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution. You can recover additional power points for a proportional cost to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution. These recovered points are added to your power point reserve as if you had gained them by resting overnight. Special: Only living creatures can use this feat. You can take advantage of this feat only while in your own body. I agree that how you present it makes it highly abuseable. My feeling is that in order to regain the lost ability points, you would only recover those at the end of a 3FC, which means at the end of the day. Since this power does not indicate that the ability points are gained back in any other way, only normal means (rest, Lesser Restoration, etc) would allow them to be restored. The Nimbus will fix anything that is inflicted by an opponent, and even some things you do to yourself accidentally (such as poisoning yourself), but I don't think that we should allow it to fix things that you do to yourself intentionally like this. Otherwise this feat is extremely abuseable in our environment. So in short, (and this might be considered a houserule), I would say that the feat itself can be used from fight to fight to gain the power points that it allows, but the ability damage is not restored until the end of the character's 3 FC (i.e. the end of the day).
Macbrea 12-17-06, 02:16 PM	Is a horse allowed to use deflect arrows without hands?
MindWandererB 12-17-06, 02:34 PM	Is a horse allowed to use deflect arrows without hands? Since any natural weapon allows you to qualify for the feat, any natural weapon allows you to use it. So they need a mouth free, since they have a bite attack.
Erithmu 12-17-06, 04:27 PM	I agree that how you present it makes it highly abuseable. My feeling is that in order to regain the lost ability points, you would only recover those at the end of a 3FC, which means at the end of the day. Since this power does not indicate that the ability points are gained back in any other way, only normal means (rest, Lesser Restoration, etc) would allow them to be restored. The Nimbus will fix anything that is inflicted by an opponent, and even some things you do to yourself accidentally (such as poisoning yourself), but I don't think that we should allow it to fix things that you do to yourself intentionally like this. Otherwise this feat is extremely abuseable in our environment. So in short, (and this might be considered a houserule), I would say that the feat itself can be used from fight to fight to gain the power points that it allows, but the ability damage is not restored until the end of the character's 3 FC (i.e. the end of the day).Not in disagreement, but clarification: Note that there is a difference between ability damage and ability burn. The specifics are given in the 'Psychofeedback' information. ability burn can only be healed by natural rest, no magic or psionic ability can heal this loss of ability points.
NiQil 12-17-06, 04:35 PM	Not in disagreement, but clarification: Note that there is a difference between ability damage and ability burn. The specifics are given in the 'Psychofeedback' information. ability burn can only be healed by natural rest, no magic or psionic ability can heal this loss of ability points. That would even further my belief further that it can only be done after resting at the end of the day (i.e end of the 3FC).
Hirumajoe 12-18-06, 11:17 AM	Can you draw a scroll as a free action as part of movement if you have a BAB of +1 or greater? Can you draw a wand as a free action as part of movement if you have a BAB of +1 or greater? Edit: While I'm at it: When using the knockdown feat (or the Improved Trip feat) the free trip action (or the free followup), does it need to be with the same weapon (or unarmed attack)? Or can you hit with a greatsword and then take your free trip attack by letting go with one hand (free action) and attacking with that hand?
SauroGrenom 12-18-06, 11:42 AM	No: Yes: Use the best trip bonus you have.
Hirumajoe 12-18-06, 12:17 PM	If you attempt to sunder an opponent's magic weapon with a weapon of Suppression (+2 enhancement equivalent psionic weapon ability), what happens? 1) The sunder damage occurs first, and the item's magically enhanced hardness is used. If the dispel psionics effect works, the weapon's hit points to base non-magic hp *or* magically enhanced hit points minus damage dealt, which ever is lower. 2) The sunder damage occurs first, and the item's magically enhanced hardness is used. If the dispel psionics effect works, the weapon's hit points drop to base non-magic hp minus damage dealt so far and possibly breaks. 3)The targeted dispel effect goes off first and the item's non-magic hardness and hit points are used. 4) The target dispel effect only targets the person, not the weapon he's wielding and this entire question is completely off base. 5) None of the above.
SauroGrenom 12-18-06, 12:41 PM	Hirumajoe, This is a hard one. I must congratulate you. This combination of supression and sundering is powerfull. It's a potent combo, and it's the first time I've seen it being suggested by anyone. As I read it, the supression effect can indeed effect objects. And Sundering does indeed target the object. I'm inclined to have the supression effect go off simultaniously with the sunder attempt. So the magic of the blade is suppressed as the sunder happens. This is your option number 3. That makes the most sense to me. To make it official, I suppose we'd need to see some of the other elders give a vote as well.
TelinArtho 12-18-06, 12:57 PM	While not the exact same situation, I think this came into play in one of Kraegin's fights - versus lonewolf's Karen Douglass (not sundering, but a question of whether the suppression would occur before an effect). I think at the time it was ruled that they happen at the same time and therefore the suppression would remove the excess hardness/hp as it sunders - so the sunder has to still go through the magical hardness/hp. If someone cares to look it up before I get the chance - please do. /d
TelinArtho 12-20-06, 05:47 PM	I need a quick elder vote on the following. It was an issue originally brought up by TM in July and never received answers from any elders (at the time). MWB and I both responded, but we didn't become elders until later :) TM's original query Would Improved Trip apply to bola attacks (I can't see why not, but it's worth asking)? This would be a ranged touch attack, right? How does a character free himself of a bola that successfully tripped him? Cut himself out as a full round action (like a net)? Do the bolas just magically disappear and allow him to stand up? Should hardness/hitpoint values be assigned for bolas so that a player could sunder the bonds and get free that way? Do large sized bolas get a bonus on the strength check (and small sized ones a corresponding penalty), or is the check based on the size of the character that threw them? Does readying an action to trip someone with a bola count as readying an action to avoid an attack (a fine line, for some pitlords)? I'd also like some examples of an enlarged character throwing bolas (so the bolas change size as they leave the throwers square) at a target. Thanks for the help! MWB's response Well, some of your questions have easy answers. I'll handle those. Some of them I'll express some opinions on, but they'll require an elder ruling. The bolas are not like a net. They don't trap, they don't entangle, they just trip. So yes, they "magically disappear" after the attack. Meh. Yes, it's a ranged touch attack. Improved Trip would apply partially. You'd get a +4 bonus to your Str check, certainly. But you wouldn't get the follow-up attack, because for that part, it specifically says "if you trip an opponent in melee combat...." Now for the hard ones: The language for Trip suggests that it's the size of the attacker, not the weapon, that affects the check modifier (note that unlike most special attacks, there's no bonus for a 2-handed weapon, and no penalty for a light one). On the other hand, it seems ridiculous that the bola attack would still count as Large even though it shrank from leaving you. I think a literal reading of the rules would say that the size bonus/penalty is based on the size of the attacker, not of the weapon, even if it changes size. I would rule differently in my home game if it came up, but this would be my by-the-book reading. As for the readying thing... obviously, there's no RAW answer because the rule is one of our house rules. But the way it's been ruled in the past is that you can't ready to avoid an attack, but you can ready to prevent it. Things that have been allowed in the past: readying to trip someone who's charging you; readying to cast Silence or Blindness on someone casting a spell on you; readying to disarm a scroll someone's trying to cast from; and, of course, readying to attack someone (which could potentially kill them and thus prevent their action). So readying to throw a bola at an archer, who would then be unable to finish the attack, would be perfectly legit, by my understanding. Both of these last two items, as I said, need elder verification, but that's the way I see them. The other items seem pretty clear-cut, to me. My response Yes - though, as it says - you wouldn't get a follow up attack because you are not in melee. Correct. Bolas used in this concept are just effective for tripping and pretty much are not a lasting effect. Therefore, since it doesn't mention any special condition after being tripped, you just spend the move action to stand pretty much. As to the hardness - it would be a rope that extends between the two bulbs, so 0 hardness, 2 hp and 23 break DC - if you wanted to destroy it to prevent it to be used against you again. The strength check is based on both I would assume. Much like you don't get reach from a reach weapon built for a smaller size than you, I would say you don't get the added strength check for being large when using a medium bola. Admitedly, this is my opinion though. However, a medium size thrower using a large bola doesn't get an added bonus. Nope - it would be a valid action to ready to throw a bola on someone coming within x feet of you. If his action to bring him within that range is a charge - and your trip succeeds - his action is used up. Since when things leave your possession, they become normal size, the enlarged bolas would be treated as medium size ones when they are thrown. (assuming you were medium to start with of course). Assuming my opinion is correct above, then you could have some large bolas on the ground when you enlarge - so that you can throw them and gain the bonus to tripping for size. Note - the above is how I would adjudicate in my own games. I may not be completely in line with what would be in the rules. The big question that remains open is how is the size modifier applied in the following cases: a) a medium sized character throwing a large bola b) a large sized character throwing a medium bola c) an enlarged medium sized character (current size is large) throwing an enlarged medium bola (current size is large - once it leaves his hand it becomes medium). My answers are +0, +0 and +0
Macbrea 12-20-06, 06:35 PM	a) a medium sized character throwing a large bola The medium sized creature using the Large Bola gets a -2 penalty due to oversized weapons and Must throw it two handed. Throwing the weapon two handed requires a full round action as per the throwing a two handed weapon rules. As the wielder of the weapon isn't Large size they don't get any bonus to trip. b) a large sized character throwing a medium bola The Bola becomes a light weapon in this case, Still -2 for inappropriate weapon size. c) an enlarged medium sized character (current size is large) throwing an enlarged medium bola (current size is large - once it leaves his hand it becomes medium). Throwing a bola as a large creature gives a bonus to trip attacks. Because you are large. The fact that the bola reduced in size after throwing has no effect on the combat. The rules to trip are based off the user not the weapon used.
TelinArtho 12-21-06, 12:19 AM	So a large creature throwing a medium size bola gets the same bonus to trip attacks as a large creature throwing a huge or a large bola then? (just with different modifiers to hit) Check the FAQ on the ruling about reach weapons of the appropriate size and not of the appropriate size. Something that is smaller than your size does not give you the same benefits as something that is your size.
spasheridan 12-21-06, 01:01 AM	Trip attacks have clear rules. Str + Size + Stable, feats and other items that give bonuses are clearly listed. I think the intent here is clear: Big and strong things trip better. With that in mind, if a large creature throws a medium bola - to me it seems clear that you should follow the rules above. Str + Size +..., the weapon doesn't give a bonus to trip checks, it simply allows them to be made. That aside, I think the bola trip rules are not very good. The person throwing the bola isn't trying to knock you down, so what does their STR have to do with it? They're just trying to tie your legs together. I think a better mechanic for them would have been DC (X) reflex save, probably 15 or 20. Much like the tanglefoot bat. Or have the opposed check be based on your ranged attack roll, with the opponent getting a bonus = to their touch AC or something like that.
Hirumajoe 12-21-06, 11:09 AM	On a somewhat related, but not really, topic: Since the trip attack option doesn't list anything about using your hands, and I can imagine doing a drop down to a crouch, leg sweep with a kick, and stand up motion, can someone with a scroll of true strike in one hand and a greatsword in the other make trip attacks, or does he need to drop something as a free action? Actually, now that I think about it, does a person with a Greatsword in only one hand threaten adjacent squares so that he can make AoO trip attacks? Because they can pretend its a large longsword or perhaps use the pommel as an improvised weapon with approriate negative modifiers, which actually don't matter since you're doing an unarmed trip attack anways?
TelinArtho 12-21-06, 11:17 AM	In theory, yes you should be able to make a trip attack while wielding a two-handed weapon that is not designed to trip (or otherwise have both your hands full). This might have come up in Bulgar's most recent quest, but I decided to not push the issue there - in case it was controversial. It should be fine though, since it only specifies unarmed attack and not needing a hand free. If you are holding your greatsword in one hand and have the other hand holding something else, you may not make an AoO because you do not threaten the area around you (and a "large longsword" would be two-handed for you as well, so that's not a great example...).
Hirumajoe 12-21-06, 11:24 AM	In theory, yes you should be able to make a trip attack while wielding a two-handed weapon that is not designed to trip (or otherwise have both your hands full). This might have come up in Bulgar's most recent quest, but I decided to not push the issue there - in case it was controversial. It should be fine though, since it only specifies unarmed attack and not needing a hand free. If you are holding your greatsword in one hand and have the other hand holding something else, you may not make an AoO because you do not threaten the area around you (and a "large longsword" would be two-handed for you as well, so that's not a great example...). So you would need to have both hands on the Greatsword as the last action on your previous turn in order to be able to make an AoO. Or can you reactively drop the scroll as a free action and put both hands on the Greatsword as another free action? I'm guessing not.
TelinArtho 12-21-06, 11:29 AM	You could still keep a hand free and do it - since that's the way we've ruled Deflect Arrows, but adding in another free action to the free action is a little much in my opinion.
Hirumajoe 12-21-06, 11:33 AM	You could still keep a hand free and do it - since that's the way we've ruled Deflect Arrows, but adding in another free action to the free action is a little much in my opinion. That makes perfect sense. I'm actually surprised that you can take a free action at all. It just means I need to 5' step away, free action let go of the sword with one hand, move action draw the scroll, standard action cast the spell, free action drop it, free action put both hands on the sword. Thanks.
Hirumajoe 12-21-06, 01:27 PM	If you used the Use Rope Skill as a prebuff to tie sacks on to your horse's saddle, such that they come loose with a simple tug, what kind of action would it be to drop said bags? A free action, move action, standard action, full round action? Use Rope DC Task 10 Tie a firm knot 10 Secure a grappling hook 15 Tie a special knot, such as one that slips, slides slowly, or loosens with a tug 15 Tie a rope around yourself one-handed 15 Splice two ropes together Varies Bind a character
MindWandererB 12-21-06, 01:35 PM	If you used the Use Rope Skill as a prebuff to tie sacks on to your horse's saddle, such that they come loose with a simple tug, what kind of action would it be to drop said bags? A free action, move action, standard action, full round action? Use Rope DC Task 10 Tie a firm knot 10 Secure a grappling hook 15 Tie a special knot, such as one that slips, slides slowly, or loosens with a tug 15 Tie a rope around yourself one-handed 15 Splice two ropes together Varies Bind a character That's a tricky one. If you can pass the DC 15 check for a slipknot with a Take 10, I would say releasing the bags would be a move action. That's a 100% judgment call, though.
Hirumajoe 12-21-06, 01:39 PM	That's a tricky one. If you can pass the DC 15 check for a slipknot with a Take 10, I would say releasing the bags would be a move action. That's a 100% judgment call, though. That's good enough for me. Unless otherwise Elder'd of course. And given the vague description, the only possible answer is always going to be a judgement call. Fortunately, Valen Sky has a +8 Use Rope mod. Might as well use it for something *other* than just scouting...
TelinArtho 12-21-06, 01:44 PM	I would support that assessment - so there's 2 elders in support.
Macbrea 12-21-06, 02:10 PM	That makes perfect sense. I'm actually surprised that you can take a free action at all. It just means I need to 5' step away, free action let go of the sword with one hand, move action draw the scroll, standard action cast the spell, free action drop it, free action put both hands on the sword. Thanks. Problem with this is if the spell requires somatic manuevers you must have a hand free.
McJarvis 12-21-06, 02:20 PM	Problem with this is if the spell requires somatic manuevers you must have a hand free. Which True Strike does not.
TelinArtho 12-21-06, 02:21 PM	@MacBrea - hence the reason he specifies a True Strike scroll in his question. Anyway - before this diverges too much, can I get the rest of the elders to respond on the trip issue with the bola? (MWB (just to confirm that your opinion hasn't changed), NiQil, Sauro, Pittbull (if you're still around))
Macbrea 12-21-06, 02:27 PM	Ok, silly question related to the bolas, I guess. If an expanded Large Izumi (half-giant) trips with her Kusari-gama what is her bonus to trip? Admantine Colosal Kusari-gama +1(wielded two handed, 20ft reach) +7 melee, 4d6 + 10 +2d6Focus slashing, Crit 20/x2 [+5 Str, +4 BAB, +0 Size,+1 Enh, +1 Feat, -4 oversized weapon] As this is a light weapon wielded two handed at two sizes larger then what she can wield as a light weapon.
MindWandererB 12-21-06, 02:38 PM	Ok, silly question related to the bolas, I guess. If an expanded Large Izumi (half-giant) trips with her Kusari-gama what is her bonus to trip? Admantine Colosal Kusari-gama +1(wielded two handed, 20ft reach) +7 melee, 4d6 + 10 +2d6Focus slashing, Crit 20/x2 [+5 Str, +4 BAB, +0 Size,+1 Enh, +1 Feat, -4 oversized weapon] As this is a light weapon wielded two handed at two sizes larger then what she can wield as a light weapon. Again, Trip specifies the size of the wielder, not the weapon. Her bonus to trip counts her Str, her size, her powerful build, and her feat. Not the enhancement bonus (except for the touch attack to start the trip), and not the oversized weapon penalty. No, my opinion hasn't changed. Size of wielder only. Enlarged wielder with bolas that shrink when thrown is still Large.
TelinArtho 12-21-06, 03:22 PM	Okay then, I guess I'll have my medium sized thrower hold onto small size bolas, enlarge himself (so he is large and the bolas are medium), and then gain a +4 to his trip check because of being large size, despite the fact that the bola itself is only big enough to trip a medium sized target... As long as you have no problem with this ruling, despite the FAQ about reach weapons: An ogre (Large) wielding a Medium or smaller reach weapon gainst no reach from the weapon, and thus could attack foes either 5 feet or 10 feet distant (as normal for a Large creature wielding a non-reach weapon).
MindWandererB 12-21-06, 03:25 PM	It's not really the same thing. That odd precedent that Medium arrows fired from a Large bow do Large damage seems like a closer analogy.
TelinArtho 12-21-06, 03:32 PM	Except that an arrow is a projectile fired from a projector (the bow). Any thrown weapons deal damage as if they were the smaller size: Any enlarged item that leaves an enlarged creature’s possession (including a projectile or thrown weapon) instantly returns to its normal size. This means that thrown weapons deal their normal damage, and projectiles deal damage based on the size of the weapon that fired them. Magical properties of enlarged items are not increased by this spell. And to be precise - you can't use medium arrows in a large bow (that's just not allowed...)
McJarvis 12-21-06, 03:34 PM	And to be precise - you can't use medium arrows in a large bow (that's just not allowed...) I think he means if you have enlarge person on...the arrow becomes medium mid-flight.
TheMagister 12-21-06, 03:45 PM	edited out. Apologies and moved to Tavern.
McJarvis 12-21-06, 03:45 PM	Something funny about the shrinking thing: If a certain amount of force is used to move an object (in this case a set of large bolas) that weighs a given amount (in this case 16 lbs/bolas), and then that given object has its mass suddenly cut by a factor of 8 (from large => medium), the amount of force has not changed, but the mass has. Now, I'm not too swoof on my physics, but doesn't an equal amount of force exerted on two objects (one more massive and one less massive) equal out into more speed for the less massive object? I'd be all for some extra range in that equation. :D (I'm not actually trying for anything here...I just found this passing through my head and grabbed it, examined it, and thought it was funny.) TM Yeah, because we use common sense in D&D rules so much... ;) /me finishes convincing people in the tavarn that tower shields are transparant for cyrstal shard-effects....
TelinArtho 12-21-06, 03:46 PM	Lets keep the physics discussion in the tavern...
Macbrea 12-21-06, 04:04 PM	I have a question related to the Mount spell: What tricks does the Light Horse summoned with Saddle and bridle know? I would assume the Riding package. Riding (DC 15): An animal trained to bear a rider knows the tricks come, heel, and stay.
MindWandererB 12-21-06, 04:28 PM	I have a question related to the Mount spell: What tricks does the Light Horse summoned with Saddle and bridle know? I would assume the Riding package. Riding (DC 15): An animal trained to bear a rider knows the tricks come, heel, and stay. If it were relevant at all, I'd agree with that. Interesting question: could you push it to attack? If so--a light horse is at least as effective a creature as any of the Summon Monster I options, and it lasts a lot longer.
Macbrea 12-21-06, 04:48 PM	light horses have special rules that state: A light horse cannot fight while carrying a rider. Which means you would have to dismount off the horse to push it.
MindWandererB 12-21-06, 04:50 PM	light horses have special rules that state: A light horse cannot fight while carrying a rider. Which means you would have to dismount off the horse to push it. Right. So? It might be a viable alternative to using Summon Monster I or donkeys. In fact, here's an oddball option: a ghost with Draining Touch and a wand of Mount. A darn cost-efficient way of healing (although annoying as heck to the pitlord).
McJarvis 12-21-06, 06:29 PM	Right. So? It might be a viable alternative to using Summon Monster I or donkeys. In fact, here's an oddball option: a ghost with Draining Touch and a wand of Mount. A darn cost-efficient way of healing (although annoying as heck to the pitlord). I read the mount spell as it specifying the mount can only be used for riding. This is the least-abusible interpretation of those loose words.(and believe me, I briefly thought about loading a wand of Mount into a character with credits...)
hogarth 12-24-06, 03:45 PM	I read the mount spell as it specifying the mount can only be used for riding. This is the least-abusible interpretation of those loose words.(and believe me, I briefly thought about loading a wand of Mount into a character with credits...) I agree with McJarvis. The horse serves as a mount willingly and well and that's it.
Maraxus 12-27-06, 09:45 AM	Ohhh, mighty Oracle: In some ways centaurs are normal food-soldiers, but then again, they count as a mounted duo (they deal double damage with a lance). What about the mounted combat feats: -Mounted combat -Mounted Archery -Ride-by attack -Spirited charge Can he use any of those by itself? How are the requirements in this form of use? And what was the answer about magic items - more specifically horseshoes of speed and boots?
TelinArtho 12-27-06, 11:11 AM	Ohhh, mighty Oracle: In some ways centaurs are normal food-soldiers, but then again, they count as a mounted duo (they deal double damage with a lance). What about the mounted combat feats: -Mounted combat -Mounted Archery -Ride-by attack -Spirited charge Can he use any of those by itself? How are the requirements in this form of use? And what was the answer about magic items - more specifically horseshoes of speed and boots? There's two ways to look at the feats (in my opinion). 1. Centaurs are centaur-like (see the Zelekhut (inevitable)) and therefore qualify for feats as if they had the Mounted Combat feat. This would mean they have access to things like ride-by-attack and spirited charge, but would not mean they could use a "ride" check to negate one attack per round against themselves. 2. Centaurs are not centaur-like (since they don't have the text like the Zelekhut does) and therefore does not qualify for those feats on its own. The only aside from this is that ride-by-attack is equivalent to Spring Attack and Mounted Archery is equivalent to Shot on the Run but that the mounted versions are "better" in that they are more widely used and have looser restrictions in general. I am inclined to rule on item 1, in that it seems the most reasonable. I am not heart-set on this ruling, but I can at least find some justification for it. A pure reading of the letter would certainly indicate number 2 though. As to the magic items - ie horseshoes of speed and zephyr - you'll have to get a ruling from Cat about it. Horseshoes of Speed, etc have been cleared for use on Special Mounts for Paladins/Blackguards - but they are not necessarily cleared for monstrous humanoids or other types. I would certainly allow them, but they would not be able to use boots of a like type without custom items (as in Boots of Speed (Haste for 10 rounds/day) would have to be customized to Horseshoes of Haste, etc).
MindWandererB 12-27-06, 12:11 PM	I would agree with #1. Note, however, that Mounted Archery simply doesn't work when you're doing your own movement. The other two should be functional, though.
Maraxus 12-27-06, 12:24 PM	Ride-by attack has no effect whatsoever, unless you are attacking exactly from the right direction. I personally think it is stupid, if an ability depends on your position relative to the compass, but that's the way it goes: As this picture shows: http://www.hwx.it/coco/coco.php;v=1;map=plains;a=Name,M,33,67;b =Name,L,33,61,33,66;c=Name,M,39,67;d=Nam e,L,40,61,40,66,40,71;e=Name,M,45,67;f=N ame,L,51,61,46,66 B can freely charge to the next square from which it can attack and then continue to move in a straight line after this, A and C can't, because the closest square from which they attack goes in a straight line towards the target, so the movement can not be continued straight. ... Okay, it is half way nice, if mount and rider have diffrent reachs but for the centaur, it's only a requirement for the great spirited charge. (Right?)
TelinArtho 12-27-06, 12:28 PM	Actually, the way I most commonly use ride-by-attack is to hit with my lance, and then "finish" moving by basing the opponent - which is just 5ft more - but enough to qualify as moving after the attack. I think it has been clarified that ride-by-attack can be used in the situation above for all 3 - you might need to check the FAQ on that though.
Maraxus 12-27-06, 01:01 PM	Okay, if this shall be the effect. After seeing Spring attack and flyby attack, I thought, it would be good if it allowed you to close in, attack, get distance again. And that is hardly possible. I don't want to make this a discussion thread, so I edit here: MindWanderer: *check* looks like you are right. I thought it was only "move directly towards the closest space from where you can attack" ... Well, it stays, what Telin said: You can charge, attack with a lance and adject to your opponent. Not really what you think of when you hear "Ride-by-attack" but can be useful, to threaten spellcasters on the really low levels, where they do not yet auto-succede when casting defencively.
MindWandererB 12-27-06, 01:03 PM	The FAQ actually says that Ride-By Attack is almost completely useless as written (B can't use it, either, because they must move directly toward the subject of a charge). Oddly, it doesn't suggest any way of making it work.
Macbrea 12-27-06, 04:07 PM	Actually, the mount may make a bull rush in A and C as part of it's charge. Sadly, the way Overrun(trample) is written you may not do them as part of a charge like the Bull Rush.
MitzaVolchenko 12-29-06, 11:17 PM	Target: One held weapon; see text Can the weapon be sheathed? Or is it as it seems to read, that the weapon must be continuously held? The acid is supposed to apply to the next item hit which if sheathed would be the sheath.
Macbrea 12-30-06, 02:52 AM	Are you allowed to counterspell using a wand? Example: May a wizard use a wand of magic missiles to counterspell anothers wizards casting of Magic missile?
SauroGrenom 12-30-06, 10:35 AM	Are you allowed to counterspell using a wand? Example: May a wizard use a wand of magic missiles to counterspell anothers wizards casting of Magic missile? Nope
Macbrea 12-30-06, 12:25 PM	So, that means a Wand of Dispell magic may not be used for counterspelling, correct?
MindWandererB 12-30-06, 02:09 PM	So, that means a Wand of Dispell magic may not be used for counterspelling, correct? Since that's a special function of the Dispel Magic spell, I would say that you can. However, if you used a Dispel Magic wand to counter a Dispel Magic spell, it would require the normal level check (unlike the auto-success normal for countering a spell with the same spell).
Macbrea 12-30-06, 03:16 PM	According to Sauro you cannot use the wand to counterspell at all. This is because counterspell states. To complete the action, you must then cast the correct spell. As a general rule, a spell can only counter itself. If you are able to cast the same spell and you have it prepared (if you prepare spells), you cast it, altering it slightly to create a counterspell effect. If the target is within range, both spells automatically negate each other with no other results. Which would come to the DM choice of wether a wand is considered casting a spell. If it isn't considered casting a spell then readied actions in CoCo need to be specified more clearly against the spellcasters that wield wands and cast spells alternately. Example: Relanex holds a wand of magic missiles in his hands alternates between casting spells from his memory and activating his wand. Can his opponent 'Ready to shoot Relanex if he casts a spell.' and get to shoot on either case. The problem with wands not counting as casting spells is that they are spell trigger items. They should be eligible for counterspells and being counterspelled.
MindWandererB 12-30-06, 05:38 PM	The difference is, you're not technically using Dispel Magic to counterspell using the normal mechanic. You're just casting it. ...you cast it, altering it slightly to create a counterspell effect.No alteration is necessary when you use Dispel Magic to perform one of its primary functions. Using a wand is not considered casting a spell (by oodles of precedent).
TheMagister 12-30-06, 07:23 PM	That doesn't make any sense to a fighter-class lover like me. "I ready an action to shoot him if he casts a spell at me." What does the fighter care if the magic missile comes from a wand, a staff, a scroll, memory, SLA, or a ring of spell storing? The effect is the same (i.e. - fighter eats magic missiles). The wizard in question has to speak a command word or point or concentrate or aim a wand/staff; I fail to see how any fighter [no matter how (un)intelligent] could be watching a character and not deduce that what that wizard is doing is going to generate a spell effect. TM
Macbrea 12-30-06, 08:47 PM	You are either casting a spell or activating an item. The fighter doesn't get special, "I am too stupid to know the difference between casting a spell and activating a magic item." special ability. They must be specific on how they do their wording. I cannot say, "I ready an action to cast magic missile at blah if he does an attack." as that constitutes any action that involves any action against the character. I can ready to cast on them if they attempt to attack me in melee with a weapon.
TheMagister 12-30-06, 09:55 PM	I disagree. What you're saying amounts to this: Mage: "I ready an action to cast fireball on the first enemy that tries to shoot me with a ranged attack." DM: "Sorry, that's not specific enough. What kind of ranged attack?" Mage: "Uh. The kind that hurts?" {DM frowns} Mage: "Ok, ok. Uh...bow and arrow attacks. Some of them have bows, right?" DM: "Oh, yes." Mage: "All right then. I'll go with that." {DM checks initiative} DM: "Ok. The first one to go after you is the Exotic Weapon's Master. He quickdraws a bolas and throws it at you, tripping you. Your ready action doesn't go off because the bolas is not a bow ranged attack." Mage: "...basturd..." It just doesn't pay to be overspecific is what I mean. There's no tacit difference to the fighter whether that fireball comes from memory or a wand; it's still hot. TM
Maraxus 12-31-06, 08:38 AM	You are either casting a spell or activating an item. The fighter doesn't get special, "I am too stupid to know the difference between casting a spell and activating a magic item." special ability. They must be specific on how they do their wording. I cannot say, "I ready an action to cast magic missile at blah if he does an attack." as that constitutes any action that involves any action against the character. I can ready to cast on them if they attempt to attack me in melee with a weapon. It's not your job as a pitlord to find holes in the players tactics and exploid them! Don't be a lawyer!! Your job is to run the character through the fight acording to the guidlines the player writes you in his's tactic. If it's clear what he wants don't try to find a way to interpret his words in a litteral but stupid way to get him killed. I don't know, why I have to write this at all, this should be self-evident, but somehow people don't seam to know this.
Macbrea 12-31-06, 09:44 AM	Actually, I run a character that wields a wand and casts spells. I am fighting for the fighter types to have to choose. Try and hit me while I cast with my memory or activate my wand. They are getting a free ride by saying, "I ready to shoot an arrow at him when he casts a spell." To see an example of this see Msr Hoods fight against any caster. This is a common tactic being employed. I guess I could start readying actions to say I ready an action to attack him if he does any action. As a perfectly legitimate ready action. But, CoCo prevents that type of trigger. And as a player it is my job to find problems in my opponents tactics and exploit them. I should mention pitlords generally don't follow tactics to the letter even if you give them tactics that are exact. I gave a set of tactics that stated what square I wanted to stand in. What position I wanted to be in. What method I wished to fight in. And my opponent put in tactics to put themselves in harms way. It was deamed that to do so would harm the other character and they ignored their tactics entirely to win a match versus me. I could write tactics more clear then those but I am sure the pitlord would be annoyed at the 50k character post long tactics.
MitzaVolchenko 12-31-06, 11:15 AM	It's not your job as a pitlord to find holes in the players tactics and exploid them! Don't be a lawyer!! Your job is to run the character through the fight acording to the guidlines the player writes you in his's tactic. If it's clear what he wants don't try to find a way to interpret his words in a litteral but stupid way to get him killed. I don't know, why I have to write this at all, this should be self-evident, but somehow people don't seam to know this. Actually, as a pitlord, it is our job to make sure that neither side gets a bonus from exploiting a rule. The wand vs. memory casting is something that needs to be ruled on. The instant this started, my first thought became Sybil wants to ready to *fill in the blank* as soon as *fill in the blank bruiser action goes off* and to get him to do it, 'always make casting gestures with free hand and mutter while waiting for *fill in the blank*' or 'wave wand threateningly while doing X.' Fighter types should not get spellcraft for free, and speaking is generally a free action. Since a monk can use a free action to drop a hand away from a crossbow to deflect arrows, it seems clear that waggling your fingers is likewise a free action so long as it isn't casting. If the fighter types want to be sure whether someone holding a wand is casting from memory, faking them out, or actually going to use that wand they are gesturing with like a conductor's batton, they need to take Spellcraft.
MitzaVolchenko 01-01-07, 01:46 PM	Can the weapon be sheathed? Or is it as it seems to read, that the weapon must be continuously held? The acid is supposed to apply to the next item hit which if sheathed would be the sheath. Can I get a response? It directly affects one of my fights.
SauroGrenom 01-01-07, 02:22 PM	Can I get a response? It directly affects one of my fights.In the past we've used this spell effect and allowed weapons to be sheathed without discharging the effect. The scemantics could be argued both ways, but it's not unreasonable or imbalanced to allow a weapon with the effect to be sheathed. I'd allow it.
TheMagister 01-01-07, 07:04 PM	Actually, as a pitlord, it is our job to make sure that neither side gets a bonus from exploiting a rule. The wand vs. memory casting is something that needs to be ruled on. The instant this started, my first thought became Sybil wants to ready to *fill in the blank* as soon as *fill in the blank bruiser action goes off* and to get him to do it, 'always make casting gestures with free hand and mutter while waiting for *fill in the blank*' or 'wave wand threateningly while doing X.' Fighter types should not get spellcraft for free, and speaking is generally a free action. Since a monk can use a free action to drop a hand away from a crossbow to deflect arrows, it seems clear that waggling your fingers is likewise a free action so long as it isn't casting. If the fighter types want to be sure whether someone holding a wand is casting from memory, faking them out, or actually going to use that wand they are gesturing with like a conductor's batton, they need to take Spellcraft. Completely and totally agreed. If the mage wants to fake out the fighter (I would require a bluff vs. sense motive check [which the fighter would totally lose]) by waggling his fingers and mouthing off, I'd totally allow it and praise the mage for his forward thinking. I'd make it a move action, though. Free action is too simple for the convoluted arcane gestures of spellcasting. YMMV. TM
Macbrea 01-01-07, 07:22 PM	Ok, silly question. Half-Fiend Invisible Stalker.... or Half-Fiend Earth Elemental... Is it an outsider and able to be criticaled?
MitzaVolchenko 01-01-07, 08:14 PM	Indivara was intercepted. She lost and got a week delay for that and a week downtime due to the loss. What week is she in for 3FC? It doesn't really matter as she used nothing and is frozen, but it is a pertinent question for those that are not in guilds but may be facing characters that have participated in the guild stuff.
Zevox 01-01-07, 10:33 PM	Indivara was intercepted. She lost and got a week delay for that and a week downtime due to the loss. What week is she in for 3FC? It doesn't really matter as she used nothing and is frozen, but it is a pertinent question for those that are not in guilds but may be facing characters that have participated in the guild stuff. Week 2. Zevox
Erithmu 01-02-07, 01:55 AM	Ok, silly question. Half-Fiend Invisible Stalker.... or Half-Fiend Earth Elemental... Is it an outsider and able to be criticaled?The Half-fiend has all the special qualities of the base creature. Elemental traits are a special quality of both, hence no crits. It is an outsider.
Macbrea 01-02-07, 09:33 AM	How does the following work: Cleric casts Harm and touches opponent. Cleric then casts Quickened Inflict Light wounds. Is that person hit that turn by the original touch? Is a second melee touch attack needed? Or is the Quickened Inflict Light wounds held on the hand until next turn when they cleric has another melee attack available?
TelinArtho 01-02-07, 10:18 AM	The initial harm and the latter ILW are separate touches. Each touch spell includes in the casting time the ability to make the touch with the spell. So - it would be a second touch attack but it would still all be made in the same round. Pretty effective as well if you can manage to drive your save DCs up to reasonable levels.
Macbrea 01-02-07, 10:38 AM	Yeah, it's pretty powerful strike for 11th level cleric as even if your opponent saves at that level minimum damage is: Harm 110/2 = 55 (Minimum HPs 1) Inflict Light wounds 6/2 = 3. So, 58 minimum damage even if you make all saves. Against various classes it's devistating: 11d4 = 29 + con 11d6 = 41 + con 11d8 = 53 + con 11d10 = 65 + con As you can see, without a con bonus the fighter type is the only thing that can survive the blow. And those classes aren't known for the Will save.
Abyssal Stalker 01-03-07, 02:47 PM	Do magical beast allies need to be trained, eg. teached tricks? Or can they do anything they want? There is some confusion on this; on the other hand, description of certain magical beasts say that they require training, and several other have no mention on it. On the other hand, 3 is the minimum INT for a character, and anyone can get a stupid orc cohort that doesn't need any tricks (that is, if you can find one stupid enough :)).
MindWandererB 01-03-07, 02:51 PM	Ok, silly question. Half-Fiend Invisible Stalker.... or Half-Fiend Earth Elemental... Is it an outsider and able to be criticaled? Do elementals count as "living creatures," anyway? I mean, they're not even organic. Yeah, the half-fiend template says "has all the special qualities of the base creature," of which "elemental traits" is one. Do magical beast allies need to be trained, eg. teached tricks? Or can they do anything they want? There is some confusion on this; on the other hand, description of certain magical beasts say that they require training, and several other have no mention on it. On the other hand, 3 is the minimum INT for a character, and anyone can get a stupid orc cohort that doesn't need any tricks (that is, if you can find one stupid enough ).Magical beasts with an Int of 3 or higher really shouldn't need training. I don't know why we have a rule for it. Basically, if they can understand a language, they shouldn't need to be trained ahead of time, as they can just do what you tell them. That's my thinking, anyway.
hogarth 01-03-07, 03:00 PM	Magical beasts with an Int of 3 or higher really shouldn't need training. I don't know why we have a rule for it. Basically, if they can understand a language, they shouldn't need to be trained ahead of time, as they can just do what you tell them. That's my thinking, anyway. Certainly some training is required in order to get a pegasus, giant eagle, giant owl, howler, or griffon to bear a rider in combat (since it specifically says so in the SRD).
c00lz3 01-03-07, 03:15 PM	I asked this a while ago but it got buried in the sands of time. Does transparancy extend to the share spells ability of a familiar. Can you share powers with your familiar and vise versa?
TelinArtho 01-03-07, 03:18 PM	This applies to familiars, animal companions and psicrystals alike (hereafter referred to as "ally"): 1. You may share arcane spells, divine spells and powers with your ally that you cast/manifest from memory. 2. You may not share effects generated by magical items (wondrous items, magical weapons and armor), scrolls, potions, etc. 3. You may not share effects generated by spell-like or psi-like or supernatural abilities.
MindWandererB 01-03-07, 03:19 PM	I asked this a while ago but it got buried in the sands of time. Does transparancy extend to the share spells ability of a familiar. Can you share powers with your familiar and vise versa?Nope. "Transparency" is described fairly completely. It's like Powerful Build--if the text doesn't say you're treated as Large for a particular purpose, you're not. Edit: Hm, Telin and I disagree on this one. Certainly some training is required in order to get a pegasus, giant eagle, giant owl, howler, or griffon to bear a rider in combat (since it specifically says so in the SRD).Huh. You're right. Strange. Then I'd have to say that the only thing you need to train an intelligent magical beast for is Combat Riding. It can obey any of the tricks without training, but the "bonus effects" of the package (armor proficiency, ability to bear a rider without having to be controlled) are a result of the training.
TelinArtho 01-03-07, 03:46 PM	Well, I admit I didn't give it much thought. Would you then say that an animal companion can or cannot share arcane spells (cast from a druid/wizard)? Or would your premise only apply to psicrystals receiving spells or familiars/animal companions/etc receiving powers? I do believe that spells whether arcane or divine can be shared with familiars/animal companions/etc - I just assumed the same would be said for powers. Consider my opinion rescinded on the matter until I research further.
McJarvis 01-03-07, 03:47 PM	Or would only apply to psicrystals receiving spells or familiars/animal companions/etc receiving powers? That was/has been my interpretation of it. Hence why Mort doesn't share chameleon with her snake ever.
SauroGrenom 01-03-07, 03:58 PM	I agree with Telin's original (pre-retraction) position on this issue of powers and familiars. I think the transparency will extend to allow powers to be shared with familiars and animal companions while spells can be shared with psi-crystals. Also about the Combat Riding question. It is my opinion that w/o the Combat Riding package your character is considered to be an agressive mount in battle as stated in this Rules of the Game article. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050201a) Aggressive Mounts in a Battle A character could ride a mount that isn't cowardly in battle, but still isn't trained to carry a rider into combat. For example, a riding dog might be inclined to fight when danger threatens. If you're a druid or ranger, you might use your wild empathy ability (and maybe a speak with animalsspell or two) to induce some big carnivore to give you a lift. If you find yourself in a battle while still astride your mount/ally, you and your improvised mount still act on your initiative number. You must attempt a Ride check to direct the mount's actions, which is noted in the section on unruly mounts. If you fail, the mount might stick around to fight. If so, the mount moves where it will, but you still can't take any other action in the same round that you made the failed check (you spend your time just staying on). If I were GM I'd also rule that you cannot use mounted feats when astride such an untrained mount.
Hirumajoe 01-03-07, 04:09 PM	A series of related questions to invisibility/hiding/illusions and listening (I'm curious about an illusionist build). If an invisible character (say from Greater Invisibility) attacks with a mind affecting spell (say Charm person) with no visible or audible parts, and are using the Silent Spell feat (or metamagic rod), what is the Listen check DC to hear that person? Their MS check or DC 0? Is charm person considered an attack or in combat? And if so, does that mean anytime you cast charm person you're considered to be attacking and thus your target gets the +5 to saving throw? Secondly, does the distracted modifier of +5 apply to people actively being shot at/ swung at/ dodging out of the way of the fireball? If not, what level of distraction is necessary to get that modifier? Thirdly, when does a person get a change to disbelieve an illusion and how does a pitlord decide when the person is suspiscious to take an action to disbelieve? Is metagame reasoning sufficient to disbelieve? Say I'm hiding in the forest, and make an audible illusion of many people making "attacks" from various parts of the forest, with none actually landing near my target. Does he get a save because he *knows* there can only be one opponent (or how many there are in the fight?). What if I create the illusion of several mages teleporting in and then hiding in the forest before doing so? Assume Major Image is being used (the 3rd level spell) for the above illusion examples.
Abyssal Stalker 01-04-07, 01:23 AM	I agree with Telin's original (pre-retraction) position on this issue of powers and familiars. I think the transparency will extend to allow powers to be shared with familiars and animal companions while spells can be shared with psi-crystals. Also about the Combat Riding question. It is my opinion that w/o the Combat Riding package your character is considered to be an agressive mount in battle as stated in this Rules of the Game article. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050201a) If I were GM I'd also rule that you cannot use mounted feats when astride such an untrained mount. This sounds like a reasonable answer to me. Thanks for the clarification!
hogarth 01-04-07, 10:54 AM	Since these questions didn't get much response in the Tavern thread... 1) When the Sell Item free action is used, when does the gladiator actually lose use of the item? -At the beginning of the fight? -At the end of the fight? -At the end of the 3FC? 2) Are aristocrats and warriors proficient with tower shields? Their descriptions don't say "(except tower shields)" or "(including tower shields)", so it's not clear. The aristocrat is proficient in the use of all simple and martial weapons and with all types of armor and shields.
Macbrea 01-04-07, 10:56 AM	As it doesn't seem to say it doesn't include Tower shields. All types of shiends seems to include tower shield.
SauroGrenom 01-04-07, 04:35 PM	Since these questions didn't get much response in the Tavern thread... 1) When the Sell Item free action is used, when does the gladiator actually lose use of the item? -At the beginning of the fight? -At the end of the fight? -At the end of the 3FC? 2) Are aristocrats and warriors proficient with tower shields? Their descriptions don't say "(except tower shields)" or "(including tower shields)", so it's not clear. 1) It's my understanding that all exchanges of items for gold take place at the end of the 3FC. So the Sell Item free action would allow you to sell items at the end of the 3FC. Durring the 3FC you could use free actions to "sell" items that are then translated into gold at the end of the 3FC. Obviously, this will require that the sold items still be in your inventory at the end fo the 3FC. So you're not allowed to sell a potion with a free action in week 1 then drink the potion in week 3. In a case like this, your free aciton is wasted. 2) I'm thinking that tower shields are not included in the proficient with shields description. Note the description of Shield Proficiency and Tower Shield Proficiency as feats. You see that many classes get Shield Proficiency as a bonus feat, but only fighters get Tower Shield Proficiency as a bonus feat. This is what is happening in the case of the Aristocrat. No Tower Shield Proficiency for Aristocrats w/o taking the feat.
SauroGrenom 01-04-07, 05:00 PM	A series of related questions to invisibility/hiding/illusions and listening (I'm curious about an illusionist build). If an invisible character (say from Greater Invisibility) attacks with a mind affecting spell (say Charm person) with no visible or audible parts, and are using the Silent Spell feat (or metamagic rod), what is the Listen check DC to hear that person? Their MS check or DC 0? Is charm person considered an attack or in combat? And if so, does that mean anytime you cast charm person you're considered to be attacking and thus your target gets the +5 to saving throw? Secondly, does the distracted modifier of +5 apply to people actively being shot at/ swung at/ dodging out of the way of the fireball? If not, what level of distraction is necessary to get that modifier? Thirdly, when does a person get a change to disbelieve an illusion and how does a pitlord decide when the person is suspiscious to take an action to disbelieve? Is metagame reasoning sufficient to disbelieve? Say I'm hiding in the forest, and make an audible illusion of many people making "attacks" from various parts of the forest, with none actually landing near my target. Does he get a save because he *knows* there can only be one opponent (or how many there are in the fight?). What if I create the illusion of several mages teleporting in and then hiding in the forest before doing so? Assume Major Image is being used (the 3rd level spell) for the above illusion examples. You've asked so many questions all at once that this is a cluster-muck. I'll try and pick this apart into some reasonable questions with concise answers. First off we have decided in CoCo that any attack has a listen DC of 0. It doesn't matter if this attack is a greatsword or a spell or a silenced spell. Also casting anything with a verbal component can be heard with a listen DC of 0. In most cases where there is an attack with a spell (touch spells for example), these two things are combined. For example a Harm spell causes damage and uses a touch attack. Casting can be silenced by using a metamagic rod, but the touch attack still makes noise that can be heard with DC 0 listen checks. Charm Person in the CoCo context is considered to be an attack. At the roll of initiative, everyone in the battle knows that battle has begun. Even if the caster isn't attacking the target, he is certianly threatening the target. I don't see any distraction modifier for the save on this spell in the SRD. I don't know what you're talking about. It's probably going to fall to the pitlord to decide when a person gets to disbelieve an illusion. This will be highly situational. MetaGame info should not be a basis for disbelieving anything in the game. But character intelligence and wisdom would play a roll in my opinion. A character with high Knowledge Nature may know that the figment tree you conjur is impossibly large for this area or the species is not natural to this region or some such. If I were GM at a TT game, I'd allow such skill checks to be a part of the game. But in CoCo we must fall back on pitlords to make those decisions as needed on a case by case basis.
Hirumajoe 01-04-07, 05:44 PM	Charm Person in the CoCo context is considered to be an attack. At the roll of initiative, everyone in the battle knows that battle has begun. Even if the caster isn't attacking the target, he is certianly threatening the target. I don't see any distraction modifier for the save on this spell in the SRD. I don't know what you're talking about. Apologies for the mass of questions at once. On re-reading it, is rather confusingly worded. The distraction was in reference to making a listen check. Simply put: Are you considered distracted in the middle of combat. I.e. when you're dodging arrows coming straight at you or trying to roll to avoid a Fireball doesn't necessarily mean your focus is on slight hum in the background. I'm guessing the answer is no, but I'd thought I'd ask. And if the answer is no, what would be necessary to get the +5 distracted listen penalty. You pretty much answered my other questions. Thank you.
SauroGrenom 01-04-07, 05:54 PM	Althought it's reasonable to think that being in combat would be distracting, application of this modifier to listen checks would be highly situational and impractical/inconsistant to use in CoCo. Players and pitlords may dissagree on when a character is distracted. If you're a battle hardened warrior, the fireball on the other side of the battle field may not be a distraction, but some could argue that a fireball is a distraction no matter where it's at. So I don't think we can realy decide what circumstances apply to being distracted. In general this is not being used in CoCo.
McJarvis 01-04-07, 10:46 PM	Rules of the Game articles specify that a character gets "meaningful interaction" (or rather, a will save to disbelieve) with an illusion in very specific circumstances. 1) The illusion in question attacks or is attacked by the character in question. 2) The character takes at least a move-action equivilent to study the illusion. As for the meta-game, surely your opponent knows you might be using an illusion...but it is ultimately their choice as to how to approach such things in the arena. (tactics should probably specify whether they want to take move-actions to study or just wait for interaction) There is no room for interpretation here-> Each gladiator knows EXACTLY what he will be confronted with during a match. (every gladiator knows the exact specs of every arena & they know what their opponent looks like, supposedly) If the illusions you confront your opponent with are within the bounds of their tactics, then they should be treated as such until they are disbelieved. My best advice for using illusions to to attempt & mislead your opponent. This can be done by taking a cohort and making it look like you, making you look like your cohort, making your cohort appear somewhere else on the map to try & draw a save or die spell out of a caster...etc, etc. Illusions can be quite potent if your opponent doesn't specify to study all opponents they encounter...since in this circumstance they don't require a save until after attacking/being attacked happens.
Etiquette_Gnome 01-04-07, 11:37 PM	Wait, a silenced spell has a listen DC of 0?!
Vathelokai 01-04-07, 11:58 PM	Sorry to interupt... I'm working on a build and have a number of questions about it. They pertain mostly to interaction between class features of casters and multiclassing. 1-3 cleric (unknown domains) 4-6 wiz specialist:conjurer - unearthed aracana variant with rapid summoning 7-10 mystic thurge 11-14 thaumaturgist 15-16 mystic thurge 17-20 archmage Problems Spontaneous Casting of Cure Spells: The wording of spontaneous casting says that you can drop any prepared spell to cast a cure spell. With a multiclass caster, you could drop arcane spells to spontaneously cast cures. I brought this up before and the elders (those who responded) stated that the obvious intended rule was that you can only drop a spell from the class that has the spontaneous casting ability. Rapid Summoning: Similar to the above, the wording of rapid summoning says that any summon spell you cast is rapid. Would this apply to summon spells from another class? Thaumaturgist Caster Levels: The type of caster levels from thaum. are not specified. Although you have to have a clerical caster level of 7 to get into the class, can the spell levels you gain from thaum. go to an arcane class? The wording in the prestige class specifies that if you have multiple classes you have to pick one. Extending Summoning: Similar to the above rapid summoning, the thaumaturgist gets all summon spells cast extended for free. Does this appy to all spells, or only the ones attached to the caster levels gained from the thaum. class? Being that the thaum. class mentions multiple casting classes, and makes no exception here, I would assume that it applies to all summons from any class. Contingent Conjurations: Same as extended summoning; is this spell limited to one classes spells, or is it open to any known spell? Archmage Spell-Like Abilities: If this build converted a summon monster spell to a spell like ability, would the class features effect it? Would it be extended for free, or be rapidly summoned? Although the rules as written state that these features effect spells cast and not spell like abilities, it seams contrary to what the archmage prestige class does; could this be an example of rules as intended?
Vathelokai 01-05-07, 12:08 AM	Random Question: I was looking at intellegent items and wondering if you could pay the 5 credits to get an item based on another item, so that you could get new abilites for an intelligent item. For example; get the appraise skill (not listed on the chart) for the same 5000gp every other skill costs; bless 3/day costs 1000gp - would bane 3/day cost the same ammount. I know there would be GM/elder oversight, but I'm wondering if it's allowed.
MindWandererB 01-05-07, 01:39 AM	Sorry to interupt... I'm working on a build and have a number of questions about it. They pertain mostly to interaction between class features of casters and multiclassing. 1-3 cleric (unknown domains) 4-6 wiz specialist:conjurer - unearthed aracana variant with rapid summoning 7-10 mystic thurge 11-14 thaumaturgist 15-16 mystic thurge 17-20 archmage Problems Spontaneous Casting of Cure Spells: The wording of spontaneous casting says that you can drop any prepared spell to cast a cure spell. With a multiclass caster, you could drop arcane spells to spontaneously cast cures. I brought this up before and the elders (those who responded) stated that the obvious intended rule was that you can only drop a spell from the class that has the spontaneous casting ability. Rapid Summoning: Similar to the above, the wording of rapid summoning says that any summon spell you cast is rapid. Would this apply to summon spells from another class? Thaumaturgist Caster Levels: The type of caster levels from thaum. are not specified. Although you have to have a clerical caster level of 7 to get into the class, can the spell levels you gain from thaum. go to an arcane class? The wording in the prestige class specifies that if you have multiple classes you have to pick one. Extending Summoning: Similar to the above rapid summoning, the thaumaturgist gets all summon spells cast extended for free. Does this appy to all spells, or only the ones attached to the caster levels gained from the thaum. class? Being that the thaum. class mentions multiple casting classes, and makes no exception here, I would assume that it applies to all summons from any class. Contingent Conjurations: Same as extended summoning; is this spell limited to one classes spells, or is it open to any known spell? Archmage Spell-Like Abilities: If this build converted a summon monster spell to a spell like ability, would the class features effect it? Would it be extended for free, or be rapidly summoned? Although the rules as written state that these features effect spells cast and not spell like abilities, it seams contrary to what the archmage prestige class does; could this be an example of rules as intended? Spontaneous Casting of Cure Spells: I stand by this ruling. Rapid Summoning: That's a tough one. I think the spirit is the same-- only Conjurer spells gain the benefit. Caster levels: You got it. They can be applied to any casting class. Extended Summoning: Since there is no such thing as a "thaumaturgist spell," I'd say this applies to all summoning spells. Contingent Conjuration: Same as Extended. Archmage: Did we ever decide whether SLAs of 1-round spells take a round or a standard action? In any event, free improvements (Rapid, Augmented) would count, IMO. This includes the Extended, because it isn't actually metamagic (and in fact stacks with the metamagic of the same name).
Etiquette_Gnome 01-06-07, 07:43 PM	Here's a question that might come up sooner or later, what are some of the finer rulings in regards to Handle Animal? From what I'm reading in the skill section, it doesn't limit the skill-user in what animal he can 'push' with a skill check. Does this mean that a handle animal person can 'push' his opponent's mount (or attack dog, or whatever) into actions; up to and including attacking its master?
TheMagister 01-07-07, 07:52 AM	Don't you have to be friendly to an animal to Handle it? I know that Rangers and Druids can make Diplomacy checks to change an animal's attitude.
Abyssal Stalker 01-07-07, 08:14 AM	That would be a DC50 wild empathy check, if I read the rules correctly. And it takes 10 rounds, or full-round action if you take -10 on your check.
hogarth 01-07-07, 11:51 AM	Does non-energy spell damage (e.g. force damage from a magic missile) bypass hardness? I don't believe so (under hardness, it just says "Whenever an object takes damage, subtract its hardness from the damage." without mentioning anything about whether that damage comes from a spell or not), but TheMagister seemed to think that a Magic Missile should be able to do damage to a psicrystal.
Etiquette_Gnome 01-07-07, 12:18 PM	I know you can make an animal friendly with Wild Empathy. But wonder since the text of the Handle Animal skill doesn't seem to mention the animal having to be friendly for the skill to be used.
hogarth 01-08-07, 09:07 AM	Since there's a Thrallherd competing in the arena, I have a thrall-related question. Here's what the rules have to say about Class Feature Allies: These class feature allies do not require a share of the character's xp or gold, nor do they count against the ally power limit (see below for details on maximum allies allowed). The exceptions are Planar Cohorts (for Thaumaturges) and Thralls (for Thrallherds). Both these ally types count against your capacity of how many allies you can bring in; they do not, however, require a share of xp or gold, just like all class allies. My question is: if character A is a thrallherd who brings his thrall to a fight against character B, does character B gain increased rewards for the fight? Telin is trying to convince me that "not requiring a share of xp or gold" implies that no one else gets increased xp or gold as well. However, all the above quotation says is that character A's rewards are not reduced -- it doesn't say anything about character B's rewards not being increased.
TelinArtho 01-08-07, 09:56 AM	As I said in PM - this question needs to be brought to Cat - since he's the only who will be able to alleviate all question about it.
PhaedrusXY 01-11-07, 08:34 PM	I first posted the following questions in the Tavern, but was told that reposting it for the Oracle might be a good idea. It was discussed here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=724116&page=57) and on the following page. Hello all. I am just making my first character to post here, and I have a few questions that I couldn't find answers to. 1) I would like to create poison using the Minor Creation (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/minorCreationPsionic.htm) psionic power. Are there any houserules preventing me from doing this during the 1d6 hours before my fights? (I am assuming that I need the minimum Craft: Poison modifers listed in the Colliseum Rules). 2) Can a familiar or psicrystal use Aid Another to give its master a boost to their skill for purposes of meeting the modifiers necessary for crafting alchemical items and poison? 2b) Do you even allow familiars to use Aid Another to boost their master's skill checks at all in here? Do familiars, psicrystals, and animal companions get to make separate spot checks, and other skill checks, when applicable? 3) Can a psion use Precognition (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/precognition.htm) to give themselves a +2 to their skills for crafting? What about in combination with Minor Creation, as in question 1? 4) Could I use the Alchemist's Lab to boost my Craft: Poison modifier for the purposes of Minor Creation? 5) Do you allow psicrystals to take feats? Skill points? What base attack bonus do you use for psicrystals? 6) Can a psicrystal use items? (I think I remember seeing this used in a fight I read through on here.) If so, what are their limitations? Can they use power stones and dorjes via their master's Use Psionic Device ranks? Anything else that I should be aware of when using the above mentioned things? Thanks. After a bit of discussion, including an Elder replying with the following: I'll give you one on originality. I've not heard of anyone wanting to use Minor Creation to make poisons. However I'm hesitant to OK anyone using a spell effect (of very low level) to get expensive poisons for free. With our rules, a well built medium level psion can have a +11 INT mod and end with a Alchemy check of about +22. That's free black lotus extract (purple worm poison and many others are out since they're not plant material). At 4500gp each dose, that's too much money to make before each battle with a skill and 1pp. If this came before the elders in the Oracle thread, I'd vote to not allow it. This is an example of an idea that's a bit too good and imbalanced. Familiar's can use the Aid Other actions, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone use it on a skill outside of battle. I don't see why not, but I think it would only be allowed if the familiar had a high enough skill mod to never fail the check needed. In battle, companions of all kinds get their own skill checks. There is a communication issue. Most animal compantions and familiars aren't telepathic and cannot speak untill advanced levels. That communication barrier shouldn't be ignored. Precognition could be used for whatever you want. Use it on your free action if you insist, but that will decrease the number of pp you have in the battles. The alchemy stand improves your craft check. That bonus applies to all times you use the alchemy setup with the check. In the case of this power, I don't think so. Generally psicrystals are treated as creatures of the construct type except where sepcificially stated to be different. The differences are with respect to hp, skills, saves and special abilities granted by the manifester level of the master. Psicrystals have no hands, but they do have a few equipment slots. They cannot "hold" anything. Items that can be used w/o being held can be used by a psicrystal. This includes things like armor, boots, belts, rings and so on. TM made a point or two that requires me to clarify and modify my position on a couple of the points in my reply to PhaedrusXY's questions. 1) As I said before, I'm confident that we won't allow anyone to use minor creation to craft highly expensive expendible poisons of short durration. There are only a few on the list of poisons that are clearly made from plants. Even here, it's not clear if they are made entirely from plants. Black Lotus Extract may be dissolved in fat rendered from baslisk brain. Others are clearly from animal sources of some kind. I bring this up only as a rationalizaiton. My opinion is that although this is a cute idea, we cannot allow it in CoCo. 2) I agree that it's probably cheesy to have familiars or psicrystal aid another on skill checks outside of combat. But I don't see anything that doesn't allow it. As mentioned before, I'd allow it only if the companion has no chance of failure. 3) TM makes a great point about the durration of Precognition. It's not long enough to remain in effect through an entire day of crafting. 4) This is a clear no. The Alchemy Lab (or any MW tool) gives a bonus when using it. When using a power to craft something out of ether with a spell effect, you are not using the tool to craft. You are using the spell and your skill to create in a way that doesn't require tools. Thus bonuses from MW tools do not apply. 5) As mentioned before you can find the rules about Psicrystal advancement in The PSI Consortium. 6) TM is wrong on a point here. A psicrystal could never point a dorje. It walks on it legs and has no grasping limbs. Also it can never take levels in a psionic class, although UPD is always an option. The crystal has a carrying capacity as a diminutive quadraped creature. That doesn't allow much in the way of stuff you can carry.I replied again: I understand your apprehension about making poison with Minor Creation. However, here are a few points I'd like to add in favor of allowing it: 1) It costs skill points, a power known slot, and a 1 power point per use (3 if Extended, and that adds a feat cost). These are not trivial costs, especially the second one. The third one is far from trivial at the low levels, also. Even skill points can be quite valuable. Which is worth more, an ambush round or a few vials of poison? I think it depends on the specifics of the match. If you're facing a Duergar or a prepared druid or cleric, the ambush round is obviously worth more. 2) The save DCs on most poisons are not that difficult to make, and even starting at level 3, alot of characters have the potential to render themselves virtually immune to it via Delay Poison. Also, anyone can buy a bottle of Antitoxin for a +5 to their saves, and if they knew they were facing a character who'd be using this, I'm sure alot would. I've always thought poisons were entirely overpriced, anyway. Noone ever uses them in real games, unless they get them cheaply or for free, as I am trying to do. 3) Regardless of justification using basilisk brains, I think it is completely legal. The poisonous component is obviously the one listed in the name. Other components are there to at most aid in the isolation of said component (which the power does in this case), or in its delivery. So at most, I could see this justification lowering the save DC on the poison, not making it wholly unuseable. Even if you find my arguments unconvincing enough to allow the tactic completely, I think just banning it entirely is unfair. Consider allowing the character to pay a reduced price. I think considering the fact that the poisons are temporary, and will likely not last long enough to be used in all three matches (or maybe even the first in the begining) justifies halving the cost. Coupled to the cost of sacrificing a known power slot, power points, and skill points, I think a drastic reduction in price is justified. Regardless of the comments about the CO board, the entire idea for this board started there. I remember when the original thread started. I thought the idea was to see who could build the strongest legal characters in one on one combat? Have the ideals changed so much that clever use of powers and skills are banned right out in the interest of "fairness"? I hope noone takes offense at any of my comments. I just wanted to lay out my side of the argument. Another Elder replied: About the minor creation for poison issue, I'm still formulating an opinion about it, but here's some thought process: 1. You must succeed on an appropriate skill check to make a complex item This seems appropriate as the creation and storage of poison is difficult - so an appropriate skill check (Craft - poisonmaking) would apply. 2. Material Component: A tiny piece of matter of the same sort of item you plan to create with minor creation This seems to indicate to me that the character must already have some of the poison available in order to create more of it - so there's some GP investment. In all fairness, a bought dose in my opinion would suffice to allow this. It is unclear to me if the material component is used up on one casting... Hmmm - since this is a psionic power - there is no material component... 3. It must be non-living vegetable matter. Of the poisons, it is difficult to tell which ones are vegetable as opposed to animal, but here's the list I would start with: Contact:Nitharit (DC13, 0, 3d6 Con), Sassone Leaf Residue (DC16, 2d12hp, 1d6 con), Malyss Root Paste (DC16, 1 dex, 2d4 dex), Terinav Root (DC16, 1d6 dex, 2d6 dex), Black Lotus Extract (DC20, 3d6 con, 3d6 con) Ingested: Striped Toadstool (DC11, 1 Wis, 2d6 Wis + 1d4 Int), Id Moss (DC14, 1d4 Int, 2d6 Int) Inhaled: None Injury: Bloodroot (DC12, 0, 1d4 Con + 1d3 Wis), Blue Whinnis (DC14, 1 con, unconsciousness) 4. How much can be created? One dose is clearly less than 1cu ft/level. In fact, one dose is probably in excess of 16 doses (if one dose was 1 oz, then that would be 16...). This is where it can get very abusable. Obviously the player would not be able to sell of his creation. 5. What does allowing this use mean? At ECL3, a character can use 1pp and have a prebuff for 3 hours or use it during the fight (but the casting time is 1 minute...). Alternatively, he could cast it with extend power and get 6 hours out of it. Obviously, no matter what it wouldn't extend beyond the 3FC. 6. Where does the created matter go? I wouldn't agree with allowing it to be placed directly on a weapon, and I would certainly agree with an additional 5% chance to poison oneself with it - since it would need to be handled twice effectively (once to finish the power, once to apply it to a weapon) 7. How abusable is it? If the character is up against duergars or even melee dwarves it is fairly unlikely that they will be at risk from the poison; Delay Poison is a low level spell that could be available to someone for a 150gp scroll (actually 50gp with a ranger-scribed for divine or even 25gp for a bard-scribed for arcane...) or 300gp potion - and it is on the spell list of a few classes (Druid, Ranger, Cleric, Paladin and Bard). I don't know psionics well, but there may be a similar power for that function as well. If you were real cheap - you could even get the ultra cheap Bard brewed Delay Poison potion for 50gp and credits... Antitoxin is around but considering the availability of the other ones, I don't think it is as good an option. My vote on this is still out - but I did want to just put some of this out there.Elder SauroGrenom weighed in on the issue again, and instructed me that I might bring it up here: PhaedrusXY, I wasn't around for the 1st incarnation of CoCo. From what I understand, CoCo was created as a way to test builds from the optimization boards against one another and see who's build is the best. Since that original concept, CoCo has grown into something different. People still want to test builds, but the idea isn't about exploiting loopholes in the rules to build an uber character. If that was the case, everyone would have the same 3 or 4 characters. We want a place that isn't just fun to play for 2 months, but also fun to play for 2 years. That means that when we hit gray area's in the rules (like this) we need to make sure that we don't disrupt the balance of the whole game and ruin the fun for everyone else. We are using core rules (augmented with other stuff), and we don't have a DM to arbitrate Rule Zero on a case by case basis. We don't have any problems with clever ideas. And we won't ban anything right now. The question was if it would be allowed to use a 1st level power to make poisons, and I say no. You can still use the power, but just not to make things that are so expensive and expendable. From a balance perspective the idea of using a single pp to manufacture over 4000gp in expendable single use items for a fight is way imbalanced, no matter how much you invest in powers, feats or skills. If you stick around a while, you will see that wealth/xp is a major predictor of success in CoCo. We work really hard to make sure that the rules prevent anyone from dramatically increasing their wealth/xp ratio. What you are suggesting does just that. You are suggesting to increase your wealth in every fight by a few thousand gp with the cost of 1pp. Also I'm not convinced that the cost of 1 power and 1 skill point/level is much of a cost to a psion. This idea has fantastic internal synergy. High INT allows more skill points and makes more pp available and is the stat needed for the craft skill. So the investment doesn't really hurt your character or create a weakness in some other place. I must say that I'm just one elder. You may find simpathy with others. There are 5 of us, and you can make your case over in the Oracle. I can understand why you might not allow the most liberal interpretation (making ~3000 ounces of Black Lotus extract at level 3 (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=747757):D ). However, if you'd at least consider letting me "finish" making the poison using Minor Creation, and therefore be able to create temporary doses of poison at a large discount, I'd appreciate it. For the record, I don't plan to go totally crazy and try to make Black Lotus extract at level 3. I was thinking more along the lines of Sassone leaf residue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#poison). Thanks for your time.
NiQil 01-11-07, 09:47 PM	My take on the Minor Creation issue: 1) For me, this is very simple. To craft poison as you ask, you must use a free or full activity (or be at character creation). The skill check modifiers are a static number that must be had in order to perform the action. The Minor Creation spell/power does not add to this check in any way, so it would not apply. 2) No. Again...you must use a free or full activity to craft, and the ally rules already state that your cohorts/followers/etc cannot create items for you. This would fall in the same category in my eyes. 2b) Yes, psicrystals, familiars, etc, make their own spot checks. But see my answer to 2 in regards to Aid Another as it relates to free and full activities. 3) To my knowledge, we have never allowed any spells/powers to be used in conjunction with free or full activities unless you are also using a feat that allows you to do so, such as Craft Wondrous Item, Craft Universal Item, etc. 4) An alchemist's table is considered a masterwork tool and would apply a +2 to both Craft (poisonmaking) and Craft (alchemy) checks. However, as Sauro stated, you would not be using the table when crafting with a power. 5 & 6) Check the Court Decisions posts in the Prison thread for rules regarding psicrystals.
PhaedrusXY 01-11-07, 10:21 PM	My take on the Minor Creation issue: 1) For me, this is very simple. To craft poison as you ask, you must use a free or full activity (or be at character creation). The skill check modifiers are a static number that must be had in order to perform the action. The Minor Creation spell/power does not add to this check in any way, so it would not apply.No, Minor Creation doesn't add to the check. It makes the poison itself, with the stipulation that you need to make the craft check for difficult items. From what you're saying, this basically means that you couldn't make anything with Minor Creation that could concievably be covered by any skill in the game (which is pretty much everything). So basically, the power would be 100% unuseable. Is that your intention? If so, why?
Etiquette_Gnome 01-11-07, 10:55 PM	One would also think that since the familiar is a class feature already exempt from many of the ally/cohort rules, it would always be present and thus be able to provide something as simple as aid another for any craft checks.
NiQil 01-11-07, 10:58 PM	No, Minor Creation doesn't add to the check. It makes the poison itself, with the stipulation that you need to make the craft check for difficult items. From what you're saying, this basically means that you couldn't make anything with Minor Creation that could concievably be covered by any skill in the game (which is pretty much everything). So basically, the power would be 100% unuseable. Is that your intention? If so, why? A) Because those are how the crafting rules are set forth, and B) because the power is not designed to be used in an arena setting. It is designed for tabletop games. What you are asking is to translate the tabletop uses for this power into the arena setting, and I see no way within our current rules structure that can be done for what you are asking. This power could still easily be used normally during miniquests, quests and campaigns on these boards, but you will run into the same problem there when trying to create things that are already regulated by our arena rules. Again...just my 2 electrums.
Etiquette_Gnome 01-11-07, 11:17 PM	As a very possibly related question, it's explicitly stated that spells with a longer casting time than a standard action take the same time to use when read from a scroll (a scroll of identify takes an hour, for instance). The similar psionic versions of scrolls, powerstones, has no such elaborative text in its description that I can find. Does this mean long manifestation time powers only take a standard action when used from a power stone? If so, that could bring the discussion for creating poison with Minor Creation back to relevance.
NiQil 01-11-07, 11:25 PM	As a very possibly related question, it's explicitly stated that spells with a longer casting time than a standard action take the same time to use when read from a scroll (a scroll of identify takes an hour, for instance). The similar psionic versions of scrolls, powerstones, has no such elaborative text in its description that I can find. Does this mean long manifestation time powers only take a standard action when used from a power stone? If so, that could bring the discussion for creating poison with Minor Creation back to relevance. That would be this text right here: Activating a psionic item is a standard action unless the item description indicates otherwise. The manifesting time of a power is the time required to activate the same power in an item, whether it’s a power stone, a dorje, or a psionic tattoo, unless the item description specifically states otherwise.
McJarvis 01-11-07, 11:27 PM	For the record, I don't plan to go totally crazy and try to make Black Lotus extract at level 3. Unfortunately, the Elders will consider this case in the context of Black Lotus Extract since time and time again Hogarth and I* have proven that we will go to any lengths to bring the stupid & ridiculous to the arena. :-) This is largely the reason why Sauro and I are mock-arch-enemies.((biiiiiiig wink at sauro)) Actually, I maintain that all of my character creations have been completely reasonable and nerfed for no good reason. -_-.
MindWandererB 01-14-07, 07:35 PM	Does non-energy spell damage (e.g. force damage from a magic missile) bypass hardness? I don't believe so (under hardness, it just says "Whenever an object takes damage, subtract its hardness from the damage." without mentioning anything about whether that damage comes from a spell or not), but TheMagister seemed to think that a Magic Missile should be able to do damage to a psicrystal. This is actually a more oddball question than it looks, since Magic Missile cannot target objects. The question of whether force damage bypasses hardness is thus unclear. However, Hirumajoe seems to be correct--unlike damage resistance, it appears that magical or unspecified damage types are affected by hardness, since the text doesn't specify any exceptions.
TheMagister 01-15-07, 07:52 AM	This is actually a more oddball question than it looks, since Magic Missile cannot target objects. Only kinda odd; psicrystals are constructs with an object's DR. All this would be different if they gave them DR 8/adamantine. ... Or would it? :P My reasons for allowing force damage to bypass hardness are purely aesthetic. It sounds right to my 2nd ed. brain. :rolleyes:
MitzaVolchenko 01-16-07, 04:53 PM	If I had both of you sitting with him at the midway point of the corridor and you at a corner without LOS to either one, I hate to tell you, but Sybil is the one who is going to get hit with the penalty. Why? Because, in the spirit of the rule, you should not penalize the character who cannot overcome a proactive tactic of his/her opponent. If a flying character is above a melee character who has no ranged weapon, the melee character is not to get penalized while avoiding combat - hoping to find an edge to get in. In most of the above situations that I have run, the person that could not reach the flyer, surrenders. I do not agree with this interpretation of what delay is. The specific in question, is unimportant. The idea that you negate superior movement and penalize someone because they can outmaneuver their opponent strikes me as bogus.
TelinArtho 01-16-07, 05:56 PM	In most situations, the decision to surrender is based more on the finiteness of the advantage of the other opponent. Sir Valkin, for instance, did not surrender versus Thelgar and instead evaded him for the entire duration of Thelgar's fly spell. Yes Sir Valkin had a ranged weapon, but given Thelgar's relative lack of ability to damage Sir Valkin - he took the time to wait out the buff. In the case of Bulgar vs Blizzard, Bulgar surrendered because Blizzard's speed advantage was not going to go away, Blizzard could not be affected by ranged attacks and Blizzard had enough ranged capability (and ammunition) to make me believe that a full run out wasn't worth it. And to be precise, I did not penalize your speed advantage - its just that your speed advantage isn't as much of a help to you on a small map, with tight corners and short corridors.
MitzaVolchenko 01-17-07, 01:58 AM	In most situations, the decision to surrender is based more on the finiteness of the advantage of the other opponent. Sir Valkin, for instance, did not surrender versus Thelgar and instead evaded him for the entire duration of Thelgar's fly spell. Yes Sir Valkin had a ranged weapon, but given Thelgar's relative lack of ability to damage Sir Valkin - he took the time to wait out the buff. In the case of Bulgar vs Blizzard, Bulgar surrendered because Blizzard's speed advantage was not going to go away, Blizzard could not be affected by ranged attacks and Blizzard had enough ranged capability (and ammunition) to make me believe that a full run out wasn't worth it. And to be precise, I did not penalize your speed advantage - its just that your speed advantage isn't as much of a help to you on a small map, with tight corners and short corridors. Telin, hon, I am over discussing the individual fight. Please see TM's commentary on the fight. This is not the first fight that you have run where it seems you had decided in advance what the outcome was likely to be and run it to fit that outcome. I harp at Macbrea about that all the time when he does it. I do not care what happens with that individual fight. I want to know if that attitude expressed is in compliance with the intent of the delay penalty.
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 12:02 PM	Silly question...Pitlords says it is fine for a character to be in two places at the same time if one of them is a guild CAP...I have a problem with that. I am not allowed to be active in the arena and pay my credits to be on quest as well. Why does being in a guild mean I get to be in two places at once? That seriously needs to be looked at. It seems to penalize those not in guilds as they cannot earn xp/gold for being in two places at once. More precisely it penalizes those that are not geting CAP's spent on them in guilds (which is an even narrower pool).
Zevox 01-20-07, 12:11 PM	Silly question...Pitlords says it is fine for a character to be in two places at the same time if one of them is a guild CAP...I have a problem with that. I am not allowed to be active in the arena and pay my credits to be on quest as well. Why does being in a guild mean I get to be in two places at once? That seriously needs to be looked at. It seems to penalize those not in guilds as they cannot earn xp/gold for being in two places at once. More precisely it penalizes those that are not geting CAP's spent on them in guilds (which is an even narrower pool). Hold up - this is new. Since when can those on Guild actions that involve fights do anything else? Thats never been done before to my knowledge. I know those on Guild actions that involve fights - like contests or covert operations - can still participate in things as normal, but I've never heard of someone in the arena/on a quest and doing a Guild action at the same time. Zevox
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 12:31 PM	To clarify, the example that brought this to my attention is a befriend mission (so presumably no combat), but the response I got from Pitlords was not 'it has no fght, so it desn't count.' The response was 'it is a CAP action and can be done at the same time.' I disagree with any character being in two places at once, period. If a player wants to support a guild by using their character time to do so, great! However, they should be making some sacrifice to do so.
Caterane 01-20-07, 12:44 PM	*sigh* Look. Let's say the EHTC spends on Jan 17 a prescious CAP to send Archhalffiend Asran :P on an Operation to attack the Watchful Eye. The Operation would begin on Jan 24. Ok. Also on Jan 17, Asran - having nothing to do - fights in the arena against Matzi Velchonko. His pitlord however doesn't run the fight so this arena fight goes into week 2 on Jan 24. Since we do not penalize guilds for pitlord mistakes, Asran both fights his (extended) arena fight and launches his (new) operation against EYE. That's what happened this week with Iced. And it's not the first time; I remember it occured to Daisy and someone else in the past.
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 01:04 PM	*sigh* Look. Let's say the EHTC spends on Jan 17 a prescious CAP to send Archhalffiend Asran :P on an Operation to attack the Watchful Eye. The Operation would begin on Jan 24. Ok. Also on Jan 17, Asran - having nothing to do - fights in the arena against Matzi Velchonko. His pitlord however doesn't run the fight so this arena fight goes into week 2 on Jan 24. Since we do not penalize guilds for pitlord mistakes, Asran both fights his (extended) arena fight and launches his (new) operation against EYE. That's what happened this week with Iced. And it's not the first time; I remember it occured to Daisy and someone else in the past. Guilds should be penalizd the same as a gladiator is penalized for fights not being completed. If a gladiator is delayed, a gladiator is delayed. Look at it this way. Matzi Volchonko wants to go on quest or MQ but she can't because she is stuck in a bloody held over fight for the umpteenth time (note that there are characters out there who average two weeks per each fight run). She does not get the option to just go on her quest while the held over fight is being run. She can't even get out of the 3FC or surrender the un-run fight to get free to do as she wishes because the PL has to post the surrender to make it official. I play in the guild system. I get benefits from it. I have an issue with the guild system benefits being greater than the non-guild benefits. The guilds are an extra. The main point of the board is the arena and build testing. Guilded characters already can get quests paid for by the guild in the guise of a guild operation (fine, though not really fair to non-guild players). I personally do not think that this is a precedent that should be set or upheld. I don't care which guild(s) has gotten the benefit of this. It shouldn't be allowed to happen.
MindWandererB 01-20-07, 01:13 PM	The problem is that character development is not time-sensitive, while the guilds are. If you're in five held-over fights, and your character is thus a level behind where they could be--so what? You're competing against your own level anyway. So your quest is held a week later--there's no harm in that. But the guilds are in a constant race. One week can make a tremendous difference between two guilds trying to reach the same goal, or a guild taking advantage of an attack opportunity that's only available for that one week. A held-over intercept of a character trying to rob another guild's treasury might fail because they built a lock in the meantime. The guild system already has issues where they're not on equal footing due to their differential membership. Lets not compound that with pitlord limitations.
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 01:21 PM	The problem is that character development is not time-sensitive, while the guilds are. If you're in five held-over fights, and your character is thus a level behind where they could be--so what? You're competing against your own level anyway. So your quest is held a week later--there's no harm in that. But the guilds are in a constant race. One week can make a tremendous difference between two guilds trying to reach the same goal, or a guild taking advantage of an attack opportunity that's only available for that one week. A held-over intercept of a character trying to rob another guild's treasury might fail because they built a lock in the meantime. The guild system already has issues where they're not on equal footing due to their differential membership. Lets not compound that with pitlord limitations. Good point, however, I am not sure that I agree that the guild time sensitivity is in any way more important than say it taking someone a year to get their build anywhere rather than four months due to pitlord holdovers. This gets compounded by the guilds being limited space and approval membership (neither of which Ithink should be changed). Don't know what the answer is, but this seems wrong to me. One person, one place, one time. If you want to be sure you are free for guild action assign to guild action...or if it is so time sensitive, have an option to surrender and sacrifice the fight to take on the guild mission...hrm...that doesn't seem quite right either... *shrugs* I've lodged my concern. Perhaps an option to cancel a match when it gets held over? Dunno.
Caterane 01-20-07, 01:39 PM	We have actually deviced a good rule to make it possible that a character fights in two locations at the same time and deducts ressources and spells used from both. We cannot however delay the guild system and cancels are unfair to both players (there might be a non-guild PC as opponent who loses his match then for no benefit). I don't know why this so bothers you when actually no one is harmed by it.
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 01:59 PM	We have actually deviced a good rule to make it possible that a character fights in two locations at the same time and deducts ressources and spells used from both. We cannot however delay the guild system and cancels are unfair to both players (there might be a non-guild PC as opponent who loses his match then for no benefit). I don't know why this so bothers you when actually no one is harmed by it. The focus has been more and more leaning toward the guilds. It has been increasingly favoring the guilds. I have recently brought a new person in, and I have a couple of more that I am working on getting into the CoCo. I take their feedback seriously. When discussing the guild system and what not, they notice things like the no credit quests. You say it doesn't hurt anyone, but it does give some a leg up. Which means that the newer player or the non-guild player gets to watch others gain beneifts that they do not get...and these are fight affecting and level-up affecting. How about allowing all guild actions to be covered in the guild game, but do not give any reward nor use any item from a character on them? The guild actions go off if there are enough PL's to run them and no individual benefit is garnered from them. Essentailly let all guild fights/actions be treated as frozen. They still get rp fired up, but they don't give an unfair edge to anyone and the guild scoreboard is the only thing that gets affected while the arena remains sacrosanct.
MindWandererB 01-20-07, 02:39 PM	Do this, and everyone will quit all the guilds. I know I would never do guild battles with my own, non-frozen characters if they gained no XP for it.
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 03:11 PM	Do this, and everyone will quit all the guilds. I know I would never do guild battles with my own, non-frozen characters if they gained no XP for it. Even if it didn't take away from your other pursuits?
MindWandererB 01-20-07, 03:13 PM	My other pursuits do include leveling up my characters. If I had to choose between gaining XP for myself, or for promoting the guild's agenda, I'd be very reluctant to do guild stuff, and I'd almost never do guild quests or other extended actions. I only have so many activations, and I want to gain XP with all of them if at all possible.
MitzaVolchenko 01-20-07, 05:15 PM	My other pursuits do include leveling up my characters. If I had to choose between gaining XP for myself, or for promoting the guild's agenda, I'd be very reluctant to do guild stuff, and I'd almost never do guild quests or other extended actions. I only have so many activations, and I want to gain XP with all of them if at all possible. My point would be that you could be involved in a guild actions *and* active in the arena. You simply lose and gain nothing for guild actions which are still limited by CAP's.
MindWandererB 01-21-07, 12:29 AM	Or, you mean that guild battles wouldn't cost you activations, and you could double-book to your heart's content? It has possibilities.
Caterane 01-21-07, 09:46 AM	These double activations are an emergency solution in order to not disrupt the guild flow (which must not and cannot be disrupted as MWB and I explained above) but they are nethertheless not perfectly flawless since a character might use up the same ressource or spell in both of his fights (we also have a rule for that of course: he removes another one of equal value or spell level instead) but it is not so flawless as to allow everyone to double activate. It's just that: an emergency in case your fight is extended by a week which is not happening all too often (1-2 fights a week out of 20-30). Also, guild quests cost no credits because you are not persuing personal goals. Among all options for operations and missions, there's not one that grants your character anything personally, like a cohort, an ally, and what not. The guild system does not grant you anything that a non-guild member doesn't get too. The only small exception is if you just enjoy going on missions. In that case, you get a credit-free quest, yes, but we're surely not going to radically change our core rule system because of such a thing. That's like using a nuke to stop a bee. We also don't want to stop that 'bee' - it's the whole purpose of the guilds: the guild system is a platform that offers your character roleplaying options and that's what you get. Everyone can join.
Abyssal Stalker 01-21-07, 10:34 AM	Everyone can join. And that's the key :) If you think that guild system gives you something better, join the game!
MitzaVolchenko 01-21-07, 12:41 PM	These double activations are an emergency solution in order to not disrupt the guild flow (which must not and cannot be disrupted as MWB and I explained above) but they are nethertheless not perfectly flawless since a character might use up the same ressource or spell in both of his fights (we also have a rule for that of course: he removes another one of equal value or spell level instead) but it is not so flawless as to allow everyone to double activate. It's just that: an emergency in case your fight is extended by a week which is not happening all too often (1-2 fights a week out of 20-30). Also, guild quests cost no credits because you are not persuing personal goals. Among all options for operations and missions, there's not one that grants your character anything personally, like a cohort, an ally, and what not. The guild system does not grant you anything that a non-guild member doesn't get too. The only small exception is if you just enjoy going on missions. In that case, you get a credit-free quest, yes, but we're surely not going to radically change our core rule system because of such a thing. That's like using a nuke to stop a bee. We also don't want to stop that 'bee' - it's the whole purpose of the guilds: the guild system is a platform that offers your character roleplaying options and that's what you get. Everyone can join. It grants you the opportunity to fight things out in a seperate thread...something most PL's will not do. You retain control over your character and get RP to go with it. Or, you mean that guild battles wouldn't cost you activations, and you could double-book to your heart's content? It has possibilities. That is precisely what I mean. Play the guild game as a seperate set of activities. It has no impact on the Arena, levelling, or anything else...it is just the guild game. It also means that you can use your full character abilities in the guild game without worrying that you are going to doulbe use anything like a spell asmentioned above. Guild activations are spent out of cycle and do not impact a character's ability to do anything else they like. The only argument I can see against it is the use of Pitlords. Most of our truly active pitlords are likely to be willing to run guild stuff on top of normal fight loads for the sake of keeping the guild system rolling (I know that I am).
Macbrea 01-21-07, 12:49 PM	Can someone explain how people keep doing out of cycle miniquests to level up their character? Since, were does it say that you don't have to follow the normal cycle rules to get around the 3FC? I have seen multiple quests in which the person was within 1 fight of leveling and was allowed to take an out of cycle activity to get more exp. Level the character then spend their gold. If this is allowed. I wish to set Relanex to always being out of cycle.
Abyssal Stalker 01-21-07, 12:55 PM	Can someone explain how people keep doing out of cycle miniquests to level up their character? Since, were does it say that you don't have to follow the normal cycle rules to get around the 3FC? I have seen multiple quests in which the person was within 1 fight of leveling and was allowed to take an out of cycle activity to get more exp. Level the character then spend their gold. If this is allowed. I wish to set Relanex to always being out of cycle. Miniquests can be out of cycle, since you can set them on any EL you wish. 3FC fights must be on your ECL, so lower-level MQs can't be fitted into the cycle. But you can miniquest/quest only once per level, so you can do this only once per level, and only between your cycles. Remember also that guild-realted quests/miniquests don't count against the limit, but on the other hand they must always be on your ECL and are part of the cycle.
Hirumajoe 01-23-07, 07:58 AM	Questions Regarding the Slayer class: When choosing your Favored Enemy do you choose a single species, like Illithid (psionic) or Elan (psionic)? Or do you choose a ranger favored enemy type and append the psionic tag, like Aberation (psionic)? Also, does the Enemy Sense class ability apply to all your favored enemies or only the one you gained through the Slayer class? Thanks, Hirumajoe
Abyssal Stalker 01-23-07, 08:05 AM	Questions Regarding the Slayer class: When choosing your Favored Enemy do you choose a single species, like Illithid (psionic) or Elan (psionic)? Or do you choose a ranger favored enemy type and append the psionic tag, like Aberation (psionic)? Also, does the Enemy Sense class ability apply to all your favored enemies or only the one you gained through the Slayer class? Thanks, Hirumajoe Not an elder, but still: The question is simple. The description says that you get to pick a type of creature with the psionic subtype. Illithid isn't a creature type, Illithid is a creature. Aberration is a creature type. So you pick something like; aberration (psionic), animal (psionic), dragon (psionic), humanoid (psionic), etc.
MindWandererB 01-23-07, 01:49 PM	That's not exactly what it says; it says "a type of psionic creature." I see AS's argument, though. I would put forward that you need to choose a type following the same guidelines as the ranger's favored enemy, and thus you can't choose all humanoids or all outsiders. Other than that, I don't think it matters much.
TheMagister 01-23-07, 02:55 PM	A thought: Regarding Temporary Hit Points and their relationship to injury-based damage and effects - Temporary Hit Points are tracked as a seperate pool of HP, seperate from the character's actual HP. A character does not actually take damage until his pool of temporary HP is exhausted. Damage taken in excess of the pool of temporary HP carries over to the actual HP pool. When a character is damaged and has a reservoir of temporary hp, is he actually considered injured by the attack if the damage does not carry over to his actual pool of HP?
MindWandererB 01-23-07, 02:57 PM	I would agree with the current consensus in the Tavern: if you lose HP, whether temporary or not, you count as being injured.
TheMagister 01-23-07, 03:23 PM	Doing some research: Injury: this poison must be delivered through a wound. If a creature has enough damage reduction to avoid taking any damage from the attack, the poison does not affect it. Damage that reduces a creature's hit points. A decrease in hit points,... In addition, wherever it is relevant, the type of damage an attack deals is specified, since natural abilities, magic items, or spell effects may grant immunity to certain types of damage. Damage types include weapon damage ... and energy damage ... . Damage points are deducted from whatever character attribute has been harmed - lethal and non-lethal damage from current hit points, ... Damage heals naturally over time, but can also be negated wholly or partially by curative magic. Hit points gained for a limited time through certain spells (such as aid) and magical effects. When a character with temporary hit points is dealt damage, deduct the damage from the temporary hit points first, then deduct any remaining damage (if any) from the character's actual (non-temporary) hit points. Temporary hit points can cause a character's hit point total to exceed its normal maximum. Be affected by damage (either lethal or non-lethal) from a successful attack. Damage dealt by an opponent does not necessarily equal damage taken, since various special defenses may reduce or negate damage from certain types of attacks. Boy, it certainly seems that temporary hit points make "damage dealt" not necessarily equal "damage taken". If you Vigor for 10, take 7, and then the vigor ends, have you actually taken any damage? No. Your HP total has not changed. Think about it. Don't think about the ramifications, think about the relationship. ... In other words, tell me I'm on to something and then decide it's too powerful and houserule it. :D TM
hogarth 01-23-07, 03:29 PM	If you Vigor for 10, take 7, and then the vigor ends, have you actually taken any damage? No. Your HP total has not changed. If you take 7 damage, and then get cured for 7 damage, have you actually taken any damage? Yes, even though your HP total has not changed.
MindWandererB 01-23-07, 03:48 PM	Here would be the strongest part of my argument: When a character with temporary hit points is dealt damage, deduct the damage from the temporary hit points first...So if you're not dealt damage, then the temp. HP never applied in the first place. Catch-22. That means that the damage to temp HP is considered damage.
Hirumajoe 01-23-07, 03:56 PM	Doing some research: Hit points gained for a limited time through certain spells (such as aid) and magical effects. When a character with temporary hit points is dealt damage, deduct the damage from the temporary hit points first, then deduct any remaining damage (if any) from the character's actual (non-temporary) hit points. Temporary hit points can cause a character's hit point total to exceed its normal maximum. Boy, it certainly seems that temporary hit points make "damage dealt" not necessarily equal "damage taken". If you Vigor for 10, take 7, and then the vigor ends, have you actually taken any damage? No. Your HP total has not changed. "Temporary hit points can cause a character's hit point total to exceed its normal maximum." Therefore, temporary hit points are added to your normal hit points to give you your total hit points. Thus your total hit points have changed when damage is taken. Temporary hit points *are* hit points just as much as normal hit points. They simply can disappear on you at a later time. :) Edit: Also wouldn't an aid spell applied to someone at -1 hp bring them back to a conscious state, since their hit points are again above 0?
MindWandererB 01-23-07, 04:04 PM	Edit: Also wouldn't an aid spell applied to someone at -1 hp bring them back to a conscious state, since their hit points are again above 0?Correct. Just as casting Eagle's Splendor on someone who was Ego Whipped into unconsciousness would do the same.
Macbrea 01-24-07, 08:45 AM	I have a question: If a character with a Tower shield is grappled. Dropping the Tower Shield isn't one of the options he is allowed to do. But under the rules to the Tower Shield it states that if you take no action during the turn you gain total cover. Does this automaticly break the grapple as the opponent cannot target you? EDIT: Found the FAQ answer Grapple and Snatch Attacks: Total cover from a tower shield blocks such attacks (the foe just can’t get hold of you). The foe could, however grab the shield. Conduct such attacks just like any other grapple or snatch attack. Your foe can’t damage you unless he pins you first. You can escape the foe’s hold simply by dropping the shield (a standard action since it’s strapped to your arm), so long as the foe has not pinned you. So, apparently you can drop the shield by the faq. Though, not sure how a character can pin you if you cannot be grappled.
Hirumajoe 01-24-07, 08:15 PM	Having realized that the 2nd level psionic power Control Sound is poorly worded enough to support multiple interpretations of its effects, I've decided to stop arguing about it in the tavern and simply figure out which of the multiple interpreations the majority of elders support. Mostly I'm looking at it from the counterspelling/preventing casting point of view, in a similar way as the silence spell. Ok, first off, some useful info: Control Sound Psychokinesis [Sonic] Level: Psion/wilder 2 Display: Auditory; see text Manifesting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./ level) Target: One sound or mixture of related sounds Duration: Concentration, up to 1 min./level; see text Saving Throw: None Power Resistance: No Power Points: 3 You shape and alter existing sounds. You can target one sound, such as a person speaking or singing, or a group of related sounds, such as the patter of many raindrops or the tramp of soldiers passing by. A sound as quiet as a snapping finger can be controlled. You can substitute any sound you have heard for the target sound. If you attempt to exactly duplicate the voice of a specific individual, or an inherently terrifying sound (such as a dragon’s roar), you must succeed on a Bluff check with a +5 circumstance bonus opposed by the intended listener’s Sense Motive check to avoid arousing suspicion. You can entirely muffle a noise or magnify a sound to such loudness that it drowns out all other conversation in the immediate area. In this way, you can provide yourself or any with a +4 circumstance bonus on Move Silently and Listen checks. Alternatively, you can use up the power in an instant. You do this by modulating a sound into a one-time destructive impetus that shatters nonmagical/nonpsionic, unattended objects of crystal, glass, ceramics, or porcelain (vials, bottles, flasks, jugs, mirrors, and so forth) in the area. Verbal (V) A verbal component is a spoken incantation. To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice. A silence spell or a gag spoils the incantation (and thus the spell). A spellcaster who has been deafened has a 20% chance to spoil any spell with a verbal component that he or she tries to cast. Target or Targets Some powers have a target or targets. You manifest these powers on creatures or objects, as defined by the power itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. However, you do not have to select your target until you finish manifesting the power. If you manifest a targeted power on the wrong type of target the power has no effect. If the target of a power is yourself (the power description has a line that reads “Target: You”), you do not receive a saving throw and power resistance does not apply. The Saving Throw and Power Resistance lines are omitted from such powers. Some powers can be manifested only on willing targets. Declaring yourself as a willing target is something that can be done at any time (even if you’re flat-footed or it isn’t your turn). Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing. The Saving Throw and Power Resistance lines are usually omitted from such powers, since only willing subjects can be targeted. Psychokinesis Psychokinesis powers manipulate energy or tap the power of the mind to produce a desired end. Many of these powers produce spectacular effects above and beyond the power’s standard display, such as moving, melting, transforming, or blasting a target. Psychokinesis powers can deal large amounts of damage. For the purpose of psionics-magic transparency, psychokinesis powers are equivalent to powers of the evocation school (thus, creatures immune to evocation spells are also immune to psychokinesis powers). Silence Illusion (Glamer) Level: Brd 2, Clr 2 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level) Area: 20-ft.-radius emanation centered on a creature, object, or point in space Duration: 1 min./level (D) Saving Throw: Will negates; see text or none (object) Spell Resistance: Yes; see text or no (object) Upon the casting of this spell, complete silence prevails in the affected area. All sound is stopped: Conversation is impossible, spells with verbal components cannot be cast, and no noise whatsoever issues from, enters, or passes through the area. The spell can be cast on a point in space, but the effect is stationary unless cast on a mobile object. The spell can be centered on a creature, and the effect then radiates from the creature and moves as it moves. An unwilling creature can attempt a Will save to negate the spell and can use spell resistance, if any. Items in a creature’s possession or magic items that emit sound receive the benefits of saves and spell resistance, but unattended objects and points in space do not. This spell provides a defense against sonic or language-based attacks. Glamer A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear. The basic scenario is the psion readies an action to manifest control sound on speaking or casting of the opponent, targeting his speech (or singing in the case of bards) and turning it into gibberish or orders or anything but the right words. Interpretation 1: I'm paraphrasing MWB as best I can, but he'll probably want to correct this. Because the sound already exists in order to be modified, any verbal component will have been uttered at some point and thus satisify a spell's casting components. It must exist, therefore it must have happened, thus the spell requirements must have been met at some point. Interpretation 2: I note that Silence, a spell which can stop verbal spell casting is a glamer. Glamers change the sensory qualities of the target (in this case sound). In Control Sound's case its Psychokinesis [sonic]. It is literally moving the sound medium (i.e. air) in a desired way. It physically changes the sound, and thus should be as effective or even more so than Silence in changing the nature of sound (since presumably the vibrations in the air still the same for the silence spell). Since the target is "the sound", I believe it changes the sound in its entirety, everywhere it exists. It effectively changes it as its produced at the source, otherwise, there would be a point in space where part of the sound hasn't been substituted and thus the target is only part of the sound in that case. Other questions: A) How does one target the sound? Do you have to have heard it, or can you simply predict it will occur? Do you need Line of Sight or Line of Effect to the source of the sound, or just any part of the sound? B) Can you cast Control sound targeting someone's speech even when they are not talking? In anticipation of them talking at some later time? Similarly, if someone stops talking does the power stop? Or can you maintain concentration so that if they start talking again you still can change their speech? Thanks for your consideration. (And I'll shut up now and not post on the subject anymore)
MindWandererB 01-25-07, 12:21 AM	My main argument is actually that you can't silence a sound completely, only granting a +4 to MS. However, you could just change the sound--my concern would be balance, but since it requires concentration, it might not be that bad. Evil with Co-opt Concentration, though.
Hirumajoe 01-25-07, 08:11 AM	My main argument is actually that you can't silence a sound completely, only granting a +4 to MS. However, you could just change the sound--my concern would be balance, but since it requires concentration, it might not be that bad. Evil with Co-opt Concentration, though. Ah. Balance is a completely different argument, my concern was the rules as written, not as the rules should be. If the CoCo wants to decide its too powerful thats fine. But to play devils advocate and provide the counter arguement(s): First, there already is precedence for a 2nd level spell to prevent verbal components from completing, namely silence. Secondly, by itself Control Sound is balanced by concentration. The psion can't do anything offensive, while the caster can still swing a weapon, fire a bow, or even use silent spells. Allies change this fact, but both sides have equal access to those. Thirdly, Co-opt concentration is a 3rd level power, and combined with Control sound requires 3 pp + 5 pp + psicrystal feat and lasts manifester rounds. Also the opportunity cost of not using your psicrystal and co-opt concentration for something else. For a pure low level psion of manifester level 5 - 6, thats a hefty chunk of their damage not happening. (Unless they're a build relying on allies for damage - which is another whole issue). Fourth, counters are plentiful and available to all. At low level, spend a little cash and have an emergency supply of silent spell scrolls. Just enough to delay and survive for the few rounds necessary. For higher levels, pure casters have direct counters they can start using, like actually taking the silent spell feat and using it on select spells, or using a silent metamagic rod, or using pre-emtpive counter magics, such as Lesser Globe of Invulnerability (which is a great ability to use against Psions and Gish psions in any case). Lastly, consider other options at higher levels for psions. Lets say you're a psion with Control sound and a damaging power. Are you going to spend your turn trying to counter their spell by denying verbal components (which at high level they're going to be able to counter in some way) or are you going to try to counter it by dealing damage with a DC 30, 15d6+15 Energy Bolt which even on a successful save is forcing a DC 41 Concentration check (let us not consider the horrifying case of the failed save...).
MindWandererB 01-25-07, 01:21 PM	Thirdly, Co-opt concentration is a 3rd level power, and combined with Control sound requires 3 pp + 5 pp + psicrystal feat and lasts manifester rounds. Also the opportunity cost of not using your psicrystal and co-opt concentration for something else. For a pure low level psion of manifester level 5 - 6, thats a hefty chunk of their damage not happening. (Unless they're a build relying on allies for damage - which is another whole issue).Actually... co-opt seems to be 6th level, and 11 PP. Better than I thought. And the limited duration helps, although by level 11, spending 1 PP/round to maintain an unbeatable anti-casting field is well worth it. (Edit: I mixed up Co-opt Concentration and Solicit Psicrystal. Apparently so did you.) And what else are you going to use the psicrystal for? Not much. Fourth, counters are plentiful and available to all. At low level, spend a little cash and have an emergency supply of silent spell scrolls. Just enough to delay and survive for the few rounds necessary.Not that easy. A wizard could, by spending a lot of money, buy a couple of silent scrolls, but they'd better be exactly what he needs... and if they're offensive, the save DCs will suck (and same goes for Dispel Magic, the level check will be low). There's no Vocalize spell in 3e, nor is Sudden Silent in core. And since you can pull this off at 5th level, the caster's scroll options and money are pretty limited. Any interpretation that forces opponents to be prepared specifically for it is something we should think carefully about allowing. Lastly, consider other options at higher levels for psions. Lets say you're a psion with Control sound and a damaging power. Are you going to spend your turn trying to counter their spell by denying verbal components (which at high level they're going to be able to counter in some way) or are you going to try to counter it by dealing damage with a DC 30, 15d6+15 Energy Bolt which even on a successful save is forcing a DC 41 Concentration check (let us not consider the horrifying case of the failed save...).I don't know too many high-level wizards that can counter being silenced. Rarely they'll be packing Silence Spell, more often a metamagic rod of same, but then they have to find the one spell that will help. Dispel Magic would only get them so far, because you can just re-manifest the Control Sound (and again, there's no save). They could just try to kill you, I suppose, but they only have a very limited number of spells to do it with. And the effectiveness would depend on the opponent. If they were a single-classed wizard or sorcerer with no allies (or only a familiar), then you bet I'd be willing to forego other options to silence them. If they're a gish, then probably not (depending on how gish-y they are). I guess for now it is probably okay, since co-opt concentration won't be an option until the frozen leagues open up and someone hits 11th. We may have to re-evaluate at that time. We can try it, I suppose, and see whether it's horribly broken. A powerful ally could tip this one over the edge, as well, without Solicit Psicrystal. But it still sounds overpowered to me. 'Course, I have a low-level psion of my own in the arena--I may try it on her and see how it works. If any other elders would speak up, that is....
Hirumajoe 01-25-07, 01:39 PM	I guess for now it is probably okay, since co-opt concentration won't be an option until the frozen leagues open up and someone hits 11th. We may have to re-evaluate at that time. Or possibly sooner--a powerful ally could tip this one over the edge, as well. Woops, I didn't mean co-opt concentration (which also works though). Look at the power Solicit Psicrystal (I've copied below). Thats the one I was thinking of. Its a 3rd level Psion/Wilder power. Solicit Psicrystal Telepathy Level: Psion/wilder 3 Display: Auditory Manifesting Time: 1 swift action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Target: Your psicrystal Duration: 1 round/level (D) Saving Throw: No Power Resistance: No Power Points: 5 Your psicrystal takes over the responsibility of maintaining concentration on any single power you have manifested and are concentrating on. While maintaining this concentration, the psicrystal is limited to move actions in each round, as normal. When the duration of solicit psicrystal expires, the power you transferred to the psicrystal ends (even if this would mean that the power ends earlier than normal). If necessary, the psicrystal makes Concentration checks using your Concentration modifier. You can manifest this power (and transfer the responsibility) with an instant thought, quickly enough to gain the benefit of the power before you take any other actions in a round. Manifesting the power is a swift action You cannot manifest this power when it isn’t your turn. Augment For every additional power point you spend, this power’s maximum duration increases by 1 round. And with that last bit of information, I defer to your judgement. Thanks for listening. Edit: I see we found our errors at the same time. And interestingly enough, I do plan on having my psicrystal do other stuff, like Telekinetic Manuever. Free grapple attempt (including pinning and preventing speech) every round for manifester rounds. Hope they're packing Freedom of Movement...
MindWandererB 01-25-07, 01:49 PM	Yeah... I have mixed feelings. I'd really like to hear some other opinions, especially from elders. They've all been notably silent.... But now I'd really like to have a decision on this, because I'll probably have Maya take Control Sound if it is indeed allowed to serve as a Silence. That "target: one sound" is just too nice... you can keep it focused on the caster as long as you can concentrate.
TelinArtho 01-25-07, 02:00 PM	I'm not entirely sure what the issue is. The manifester can use the power on a ready to disrupt a spell being cast that has a verbal component. But only one spell could be disrupted at a time and only one per manifestation of the power - since the target is One sound and multiple castings of spells (especially different spells) would not qualify as a "mixture of related sounds." So it could be used to disrupt a single spell - granted without CL check or ML check or saving throw - but that's as far as it will go.
Hirumajoe 01-25-07, 02:06 PM	I think the issue is this part of the main spell text: ...You can target one sound, such as a person speaking or singing... So all speaking (which is necessary for casting) from one person would be covered under a single casting. However, I do like your interpretation, Telin, from a balance point of view.
Erithmu 01-25-07, 02:07 PM	RAI: It isn't a silence substitute (that is a personal opinion, but see below) RAW: My feeling is in the first sentence "You shape and alter existing sounds." When casting a spell you create a new sound. Now if someone wants to continually ready actions to edit this sound I don't see a major problem, but they would probably have have LOS to the target. "Muffle" Second thing is that muffle does not imply 'no sound' sound still comes, and RAW wise there wouldn't be a change of effect of the sound. "Replacement" If we wanted to get super technical we could say that, at least for divine casters, you have to pass the bluff check vs the deity's sense motive ... From an arcane standpoint and changing the sound I'm not so sure. I don't think that the power should be used in this manner and the fact that there is no DC indicates to me that there shouldn't be an 'offensive use' of the power. There is also no mention of changing targets to a new sound. Which would bring me back to the first point of altering existing sound. If there is no sound to alter, then the power has no effect/target and would fizzle. Preliminary Final Opinion: I would think that it 'could' be "house ruled" to function similar to an area silence that is readied versus casting. But only on one spell. Each new spell would require a new expenditure of pp to manifest. If used against something like Ventriloquism, then the spell still goes off as the sound is an illusion. Note that this would require a "house ruling"
Hirumajoe 01-25-07, 02:29 PM	I think I may have found a balancing factor. Go to the Concentration section of the SRD under Magic overview. You will find the following under Spell (I.e. a spell is interfering with your casting). Spell If you are affected by a spell while attempting to cast a spell of your own, you must make a Concentration check or lose the spell you are casting. If the spell affecting you deals damage, the DC is 10 + points of damage + the level of the spell you’re casting. If the spell interferes with you or distracts you in some other way, the DC is the spell’s saving throw DC + the level of the spell you’re casting. For a spell with no saving throw, it’s the DC that the spell’s saving throw would have if a save were allowed. In this case, the Control Sound power is interfering with the spell you are casting. So it would require a concentration check of 12 + ability modifier + spell level to cast the spell properly. Or am I reading this wrong?
MindWandererB 01-25-07, 03:10 PM	I'm not sure I'd buy that interpretation. I mean, Silence "interferes" with you, but there's no way around it. That applies more to distractions and hindrances of a non-absolute nature. @Telin: What's the difference between multiple spells and multiple words? It seems to me that you could alter the entire content of a filibuster, so why not a succession of verbal components to different spells? (Note: I'm being devil's advocate here, so that we end up with a ruling that satisfies everyone.)
TelinArtho 01-25-07, 03:23 PM	Finality. A caster casts a spell. The spell occurs. A caster casts another spell. The spell occurs. Compared to: The Gettysburg Address. One single speech (though let's see if the concentration can be maintained through that...). I'm reluctant to agree with the concentration check - since that makes it a non-issue for many higher level spell casters. DC12+ SL concentration is pretty easy to make. If it comes down to it - I guess we could add it in though.
hogarth 01-25-07, 03:26 PM	Finality. A caster casts a spell. The spell occurs. A caster casts another spell. The spell occurs. Compared to: The Gettysburg Address. One single speech (though let's see if the concentration can be maintained through that...). The Gettysburg Address takes no time at all compared to the casting time of Identify! :D
Hirumajoe 01-25-07, 04:05 PM	Finality. A caster casts a spell. The spell occurs. A caster casts another spell. The spell occurs. Compared to: The Gettysburg Address. One single speech (though let's see if the concentration can be maintained through that...). So if I start the Gettysburg address, have control sound cast on my speech, I can then immediately switch to the "I have a dream" speech and not be affected anymore? Or do I need to pause for an appreciable amount of time? 1 second? 6 seconds? 60 seconds? How do you determine what length of pause is necessary to cause the Control Sound power to end? Its unfortunately not included in the description. (And Elder fiat that 6 seconds (i.e. 1 round) or whatever is fine with me. :) ) I'm reluctant to agree with the concentration check - since that makes it a non-issue for many higher level spell casters. DC12+ SL concentration is pretty easy to make. If it comes down to it - I guess we could add it in though. The more I think about it, and with MWB's comment I'm thinking my earlier statement was wrong...
c00lz3 01-25-07, 04:20 PM	Silly idea about Halflings, just go about whatever your doing
MindWandererB 01-25-07, 04:59 PM	Well... no one likes your interpretation. Bringing it to the Oracle isn't going to help, because you're just going to find the same thing all over again. The flavor suggests very strongly that they are good at using weapons which they throw (explicitly including improvised weapons, such as rocks), not weapons which are designed to be thrown.
c00lz3 01-25-07, 05:02 PM	Well... no one likes your interpretation. Bringing it to the Oracle isn't going to help, because you're just going to find the same thing all over again. The flavor suggests very strongly that they are good at using weapons which they throw (explicitly including improvised weapons, such as rocks), not weapons which are designed to be thrown. I didn't think that most rulings here where made with flavor as such a strong influence. I don't own any books so I dont see any flavor text. Thanks for you feedback, new qestion in Tavern!
MindWandererB 01-25-07, 05:35 PM	Only when it might be ambiguous otherwise. Then the flavor can give us a hint as to the RAI.
Hirumajoe 01-26-07, 08:37 AM	[QUOTE=Hirumajoe;11288789] How do you determine what length of pause is necessary to cause the Control Sound power to end? Its unfortunately not included in the description. (And Elder fiat that 6 seconds (i.e. 1 round) or whatever is fine with me. :) ) Just to clarify the above, the reason I ask is I want to know if I can turn the sounds of a sniping ranged attack into something harmless sounding and also consistent with the location (i.e. the wind on the plains, a bird call in the forest, water dripping in the cave, etc). Or if I could I turn the ambient sounds into the sounds of constant attacks from various locations for more than 1 round?. I want to find out what you can and can not do with it in general (as opposed to the specific and powerful case of counterspelling). Can I use a free or move action to strum my bow ever so gently, target it with control sound, then pass on concentration to my psicrystal with solicit psicrystal, and then have ML rounds in which i can attack without facing a DC 0 listen check by changing the noise in to ambiant sound? However, if the power ends in between rounds, its useless for that activity. (It also would be useless for that if there are no ambient sounds in the various arenas, but I assume there is some, otherwise it would be useless in general in the CoCo.) Also, what happens when you replace a short sound with a long sound? If you try to replace someone's speech, are there odd drops when the person pauses to breath and those don't match up with the pauses in your sound making it obvious its not right? The bluff and sense motive check would seem to indicate not. Detecting an odditity in a sound should be a listen check, and would occur in all cases, not just someone's speech being changed to out of character. Although there is the question of why is the bluff and sense motive check at all, since the person speaking is obviously going to shut up the second he realizes his speech is being changed. Control sound is really, really poorly written.
TheMagister 01-26-07, 10:00 PM	Question: As written in the Monster Manual: Plane Shift (Sp): A genie can enter any of the elemental planes, the Astral Plane, or the Material Plane. This ability transports the genie and up to eight other creatures, provided they all link hands with the genie. It is otherwise similar to the spell of the same name (caster level 13th). Wouldn't the "otherwise" sentence indicate that the genie cannot use this spell offensively to send 1 offending creature per round to a random plane (subject to a Will save, of course), but is limited to the passive use of the spell as laid out in the ability's description? TM
SauroGrenom 01-26-07, 10:13 PM	Question: As written in the Monster Manual: Wouldn't the "otherwise" sentence indicate that the genie cannot use this spell offensively to send 1 offending creature per round to a random plane (subject to a Will save, of course), but is limited to the passive use of the spell as laid out in the ability's description? TMVery gray... Very very gray... I'd rule that the Geni could in theory use the spell offensively. But doing so would be exceedingly hard. You would have to forcibly link hands with an opponent then use the ability. Forcibly linking hands would in my opinion require pinning your opponent in a grapple check or some similar extreme measures. Then while grappling, the Genie would need to make the Concentration check to use a supernatural spell like ability while grappling (DC20 I think). Also note that you would travel with the Genie. It's not like the genie just sends you to another plane. Rather the Genie travels to another plane and takes you with (then perhaps leaves you there assuming it can break the grapple).
Erithmu 01-27-07, 11:17 AM	How does the feat Up the Walls and the Elocater's Scorn Earth work in conjunction with each other and some of the arena maps? Specifically: - Can I effectively stand on a wall? (move up a wall and then 'activate' the levitation portion of Scorn Earth. Opinion: yes) - Can I effectively Double move along a wall? (Up the walls has a 'single move' type of reading.) - Can I charge along a wall greater than a double move? (Single move distance I would say yes, double move I am not sure) - Can I effectively stand on a ceiling? (Scorn earth requires only a flat surface to work. Opinion: Undecided) - How does Scorn Earth work in the Forest's canopy? (Walk full speed without a balance check would be my opinion) - Does up the walls work on a tree trunk? (Opinion: yes) - Does Scorn earth allow me to ignore the speed reduction due to overgrowth in the Forest? (Opinion: Yes) - How does Scorn Earth work with the rooftops in the city? (Opinion: full speed movement, no balance checks) I am asking these questions due to having, in my opinion, a very generous ruling while Ephraim was Campaigning under KU. I would like to consider these things before they become issues as she has potential to enter the Iron Man. While a fun and very interesting RP aspect is to basically ignore gravity and walk along any surface I choose, I am not sure it is good for the betterment of the CoCo community. I didn't ask for KU's campaign since it is his ruling that can be used as I explore what could be broken, but it is time to get some feedback from the Elders on this.
SauroGrenom 01-27-07, 12:46 PM	My take: I think this is a totally cool character, and in a campaign I'd allow a greater degree of flexibility. But in CoCo, I think this is what the rules as written say. How does the feat Up the Walls and the Elocater's Scorn Earth work in conjunction with each other and some of the arena maps? Specifically: - Can I effectively stand on a wall? (move up a wall and then 'activate' the levitation portion of Scorn Earth. Opinion: yes)Yes, but you incur penalties for levatating, and you might become stuck up their. Once levatating, your movement speed becomes only 10', and that's going to limit your ability to come down very fast. You cannot use "Up the Walls" to come back down at full speed because the feat clearly says you must begin on a horizontal surface. - Can I effectively Double move along a wall? (Up the walls has a 'single move' type of reading.)Nope, there appears to be nothing that extends the abilities of the up the walls feat. - Can I charge along a wall greater than a double move? (Single move distance I would say yes, double move I am not sure)I don't think so. - Can I effectively stand on a ceiling? (Scorn earth requires only a flat surface to work. Opinion: Undecided)Definately no on this one. Scorn earth allows you to float above the ground, not below a surface. - How does Scorn Earth work in the Forest's canopy? (Walk full speed without a balance check would be my opinion)Full speed, but balance checks are still needed. - Does up the walls work on a tree trunk? (Opinion: yes)Yes - Does Scorn earth allow me to ignore the speed reduction due to overgrowth in the Forest? (Opinion: Yes)Yes - How does Scorn Earth work with the rooftops in the city? (Opinion: full speed movement, no balance checks)Yes, but blance checks are probably still needed. Scorn earth does allow you to ignore movement penalties, but not to automaticially succeed on all balance checks. I am asking these questions due to having, in my opinion, a very generous ruling while Ephraim was Campaigning under KU. I would like to consider these things before they become issues as she has potential to enter the Iron Man. While a fun and very interesting RP aspect is to basically ignore gravity and walk along any surface I choose, I am not sure it is good for the betterment of the CoCo community. I didn't ask for KU's campaign since it is his ruling that can be used as I explore what could be broken, but it is time to get some feedback from the Elders on this.
Erithmu 01-27-07, 01:05 PM	Question about the balance checks: Why would I need to balance on something that I have no physical contact with? What would the balance DC's be relative to the ones listed on the map descriptions (City and Forest)? Line of thinking: Balance, via common sense, normally has contact with a surface. In the canopy I could see the need for a balance check or limited to half movement due to the nature of inconsistent surface coverage, but there is still a house ruled DC that would have to be put into place. But the city roofs are just slanted solid surfaces. In my particular case could I consider the roofs vertical surfaces, horizontal, both? Is your stance more along the lines that scorn earth removes 'movement hindrances' or ... ______?
hogarth 01-27-07, 01:37 PM	- Does Scorn earth allow me to ignore the speed reduction due to overgrowth in the Forest? (Opinion: Yes) Why would it allow you to move at full speed in the undergrowth? Even flying creatures are restricted to half speed.
Erithmu 01-27-07, 02:17 PM	Why would it allow you to move at full speed in the undergrowth? Even flying creatures are restricted to half speed. At 1st level, an elocater’s feet lift from the ground. From now on, she can float a foot above the ground. Instead of walking she glides along, unconcerned with the hard earth or difficult terrain. While she remains within 1 foot of a flat surface of any solid or liquid, she can take normal actions and make normal attacks, and can move at her normal speed (she can even “run” at four times her normal speed). However, at distances higher than 1 foot above any surface, her speed diminishes to 10 feet per round. While she remains within 1 foot of a surface, she can make melee and ranged attacks normally, but if she moves any higher, she incurs the penalties on melee and ranged attack rolls as if she were the subject of the psionic levitate power. It was more of a question of how high is the undergrowth. According to the forest map light undergrowth is just listed as difficult terrain. The Heavy Undergrowth doesn't list that it is 'difficult terrain' I assumed that it was an extension of light. Tall grasses would not slow movement, bushes however would and are marked on the map (well at least the trees are). Perhaps I am just looking for a clarification to the forest map on how thick is the undergrowth, with particular emphasis on the Heavy undergrowth. Please note that I am not the only person with an elocater build, Dsugui has one and Sindorin has one in the graveyard. However, it is common agreement that the scorn earth ability is very very poorly worded. In all reality Ephraim is a questing/campaigning character and I would hope that she would maintain her 0win/0loss record throughout her entire career. EDIT: re flying: I think flying and floating off the ground are two different things. 1 foot is not a noticeable difference in terms of moving along the ground. I think of it along the lines of our starting rules for hovering to avoid round 1 entangles or similar situations.
TheMagister 01-27-07, 06:35 PM	Related question: Can one use the Jump skill to gain a 1:1 movement ratio in the undergrowth (or in an entangle spell)? Is Jump close enough to Flying to be reduced to 1/2 speed in the Forest map?
SauroGrenom 01-27-07, 08:30 PM	Is your stance more along the lines that scorn earth removes 'movement hindrances' or ... ______?It looks to me that the Scorn Earth allows you to move without penalty in areas where a movement penalty is applied due to the nature of the surface. So you would still have a movement penalty if hit by a slow spell. And you would still have a movement penalty in heavy armor or when encumbered. Some spell effects would be in the gray. For example black tentacles effects a volume of the map, not just a surface. So I'd say you still suffer the movement penalty from that. Question about the balance checks: Why would I need to balance on something that I have no physical contact with? What would the balance DC's be relative to the ones listed on the map descriptions (City and Forest)?You still need balance checks because the scorn earth ability doesn't allow your to flawlessly balance above a surface. It only grants you the ability to hover above a surface, and grants no special ability to balance better. Think of it as walking around on stilts.
MindWandererB 01-27-07, 09:23 PM	My opinions are inserted.How does the feat Up the Walls and the Elocater's Scorn Earth work in conjunction with each other and some of the arena maps? Specifically: - Can I effectively stand on a wall? (move up a wall and then 'activate' the levitation portion of Scorn Earth.) {Yes.} - Can I effectively Double move along a wall? (Up the walls has a 'single move' type of reading.) {Yes. You can single-move, fall off, levitate, then take your second move, treating your standpoint at the middle as being on a horizontal surface, but only if you are 1 foot or less off the ground at the time.} - Can I charge along a wall greater than a double move? {I'm ot sure, either. What about withdrawing along a wall? That's a full-round action, too, so you wouldn't "end" your move in the middle.} - Can I effectively stand on a ceiling? (Scorn earth requires only a flat surface to work.) {No. The best you could do would be to reach the corner by walking off it, then going hand-over-hand as with Levitate.} - How does Scorn Earth work in the Forest's canopy? {I'd say full speed--why make Balance checks when falling has no consequence?} - Does up the walls work on a tree trunk? {Yes. That's vertical.} - Does Scorn earth allow me to ignore the speed reduction due to overgrowth in the Forest? {Yes. The text is pretty clear on this.} - How does Scorn Earth work with the rooftops in the city? {Same as the canopy, whatever the ruling on that is.}
hogarth 01-28-07, 06:47 AM	EDIT: re flying: I think flying and floating off the ground are two different things. 1 foot is not a noticeable difference in terms of moving along the ground. I think of it along the lines of our starting rules for hovering to avoid round 1 entangles or similar situations. My point was just that flying 1 foot of the ground is still hindered movement (because of our particular house rule for this map, not because it's a difficult terrain square that the elocater's ability can avoid) so why wouldn't floating 1 foot off the ground be hindered?
MindWandererB 01-28-07, 06:29 PM	Because it is fly speeds, not elevation, that hinder movement. A will-o'wisp flying along at ground level is still hindered.
TheMagister 01-28-07, 08:41 PM	Since Gakhnalak's errand this week was successful, I have some questions: 1) The Fight was held in the Arena, which yields +100 REC. Where do I link to verify this income? 2) When does it arrive? The Errand was announced Jan 24th.
MindWandererB 01-28-07, 08:44 PM	It arrives on your next GAP post, so it can be spent no earlier than Feb. 7. We haven't been in the habit of linking the fights for errands, just the announcement. It should be linked in your past CAP section on your guild thread, to the Jan. 24 GAP post.
TheMagister 01-28-07, 09:05 PM	Thanks!
TheMagister 01-29-07, 10:57 PM	Could one equate a powerstone with a rock or a sling bullet or a thunderstone as far as size and rough description? A powerstone is a thumb-sized chunk of crystal... Mundane crystal can be used in place of metal in weapons or armor, using a special prging process. The fortified crystal possesses the properties of a similar masterwork steel weapon or armor, except for visual appearance. ... Any item could potentialy be made with mundane crystal. ... Bullets are lead spheres, much heavier than stones of the same size. Could one make a Mundane Crystal sling bullet? If one could, could one quickdraw it (still takes a move action to load the sling)? What difference is there between a powerstone and a sling bullet? Can you quickdraw a powerstone? TM
SauroGrenom 01-29-07, 11:03 PM	The only difference between a sling bullet and a powerstone is game mechanics of what the item is. Chuck the real world. You can only quickdraw weapons. (and weapon like objects) That means you can quickdraw a crystal shiruken, and a dorje, but not a smaller powerstone. The powerstone (equivalent to a scroll) is not weapon like in this sense.
SauroGrenom 01-31-07, 08:34 PM	This is a collection of questions I asked many months ago and never received a reply. Since I am heavily invested in the answers to each of these, I'd appreciate it if other elders can provide answers. My impartiality could be doubted, and I think we need to have concrete answers to these questions. I have three psionics related questions I'd like to have official answers for. 1) Can Overchannel be used to increase ML on psi-like abilities? 2) If arrows are used in conjunction with Telekinetic Thrust, then are they destroyed as if they were fired from a bow? 3) Do items that influence "spell casting ability" also influence powers due to the psionics/magic transparency. For example can a rod of extend spell be used to extend a psionic power? Or will a robe of the arch magi give a bonus on ML checks to penetrate PR? Or will an Orange Ioun stone give a +1ML as well as a +1 CL?
MitzaVolchenko 01-31-07, 09:09 PM	This is a collection of questions I asked many months ago and never received a reply. Since I am heavily invested in the answers to each of these, I'd appreciate it if other elders can provide answers. My impartiality could be doubted, and I think we need to have concrete answers to these questions. 1) No Abilities have their ML set in their description and are non-negotiable...only difference between is when there is a stat modifier added to DC to resist. 2) Yes Same force, wood is fragile. 3) No-each category has its own items.
SauroGrenom 01-31-07, 11:34 PM	The relevant SRD sections are as follows:The default rule for the interaction of psionics and magic is simple: Powers interact with spells and spells interact with powers in the same way a spell or normal spell-like ability interacts with another spell or spell-like ability. This is known as psionics-magic transparency. Psionics-Magic Transparency: Though not explicitly called out in the spell descriptions or magic item descriptions, spells, spell-like abilities, and magic items that could potentially affect psionics do affect psionics. When the rule about psionics-magic transparency is in effect, it has the following ramifications. Spell resistance is effective against powers, using the same mechanics. Likewise, power resistance is effective against spells, using the same mechanics as spell resistance. If a creature has one kind of resistance, it is assumed to have the other. (The effects have similar ends despite having been brought about by different means.) All spells that dispel magic have equal effect against powers of the same level using the same mechanics, and vice versa. The spell detect magic detects powers, their number, and their strength and location within 3 rounds (though a Psicraft check is necessary to identify the discipline of the psionic aura). Dead magic areas are also dead psionics areas.It is clear that a mantle of spell resistance grants PR as well. But it isn't clear if an Orange Ioun stone grants a +1ML to a manifester. What is clear is that if we can answer the question of how an Orange Ioun stone effects the CL of a spell-like ability, then we will have an answer to the question of how the item effects manifesters (ie in the same way). Psi-Like Abilities (Ps): The manifestation of powers by a psionic character is considered a psi-like ability, as is the manifestation of powers by creatures without a psionic class (creatures with the psionic subtype, also simply called psionic creatures). Usually, a psionic creature’s psi-like ability works just like the power of that name. A few psi-like abilities are unique; these are explained in the text where they are described. Psi-like abilities have no verbal, somatic, or material components, nor do they require a focus or have an XP cost (even if the equivalent power has an XP cost). The user activates them mentally. Armor never affects a psi-like ability’s use. A psi-like ability has a manifesting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability description. In all other ways, a psi-like ability functions just like a power. However, a psionic creature does not have to pay a psi-like ability’s power point cost. Psi-like abilities are subject to power resistance and to being dispelled by dispel psionics. They do not function in areas where psionics is suppressed or negated.The underlined sections make it clear to me that effects that modify ML on powers manifest by a character due to class levels will also modify ML of powers manifest by characters due to psi-like abilities (they are the same thing). Lastly Arrows used by Telekinetic Thrust cause damage as improvised weapons. The classification of the object as a weapon changes when used like this. It is no longer ammunition, but rather it is an improvised weapon. And improvised weapons do not suffer the risks of breakage when used. Ammunition is damaged/destroyed when fired from a launcher. There is no launcher when arrows are used in this way. Those rules should not apply.
MitzaVolchenko 02-01-07, 01:38 AM	If you had your mind made up, why ask? I personally think that the transparency is taken too far. Why freakin' bother to have magic and psi seperated if it is all the same...tell me does the transparency allow a mage to use dorjes? No? Why not? My answer remains 'no.' On abilities, Sliver's extra spell-likes did not get a CL bonus from her level of sorcerer they got their base as defined in the monster entry, period. It will take more justification than the ability acting like the power to convince me that it gets boosted as you suggest. As for weapons getting damaged, try a little common sense, you are propelling a piece of easily damaged wood that when fired from a bow with more or less the same force is still a 50-50 chance of breakage on a miss let alone a hit.
Macbrea 02-01-07, 08:50 AM	1) Can Overchannel be used to increase ML on psi-like abilities? No, this is the same as the reason that metamagic rods cannot be used to empower spell-like abilites. This was explained in full in Complete Arcane. The reason is because it increases the cost of an ability that you don't spend points on in the first place. You are able to manifest at a level innately but aren't allowed to apply feats to spell-like/psi-like abilites unless they are such feats as Empower Spell-Like ability. 2) If arrows are used in conjunction with Telekinetic Thrust, then are they destroyed as if they were fired from a bow? The arrow isn't magical, so it would take whatever damage was resulted from being thrown. This should probably be similar to 1d6 per 10ft of distance. Same as a fall. 3) Do items that influence "spell casting ability" also influence powers due to the psionics/magic transparency. For example can a rod of extend spell be used to extend a psionic power? Or will a robe of the arch magi give a bonus on ML checks to penetrate PR? Or will an Orange Ioun stone give a +1ML as well as a +1 CL? In the description of Magic/Psionic transparency it would appear that a rod of extend should effect psionics. Same with robe of arch magi and increasing ML checks for penetrate PR. Ioun stones have some special rules to them in relation to how the interact with psionics. This can be found here. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/items/basics.htm#magicItemsForPsionicCharacter s) But in relation to your +1 ML that should hold true. As noted you are able to purchase any of the feats that improve spell-like abilities for psi-like abilites. This is clearly stated in the psionic-magic tranparency rules. PR=SR for all purposes Psionics can be dispelled As to them being just another set of magic. That is pretty much true. They have their own set of rules and application. There is a reason they are in another book besides the players handbook. It was meant as an alternative to straight magic users.
hogarth 02-01-07, 09:01 AM	The underlined sections make it clear to me that effects that modify ML on powers manifest by a character due to class levels will also modify ML of powers manifest by characters due to psi-like abilities (they are the same thing). As far as Overchannel goes, you've asked this before, but it's clear as day: manifesting a psi-like ability is not manifesting a power. They're similar (as your quote shows), but not the same. Your other two questions are non-trivial, though.
TelinArtho 02-01-07, 10:56 AM	This is a collection of questions I asked many months ago and never received a reply. Since I am heavily invested in the answers to each of these, I'd appreciate it if other elders can provide answers. My impartiality could be doubted, and I think we need to have concrete answers to these questions. It took a while, but I've found the link back to the original question: My original question. Reply from Telin, not an elder at the time. My reply to Telin's comment. DSugui's comment. DSugui's reply to a question from TM. My last post on the subject. It's a good point that overchannel is not metapsionic. Metapsionic feats clearly only apply to powers manifest in the normal way using pp and not to psi-like abilities. But I think that overchannel and feats like power penetration and psionic endowment crossover into the realm of psi-like abilities seamlessly. MWB did make one post beyond this on the matter: While it certainly doesn't present a mechanical problem, the feat does specifically say "while manifesting a power." It's a little cheesy to use it on psi-like abilities since, unlike powers, they're automatically augmented to the fullest. <snip> For the record - I still feel that Overchannel cannot be used to augment Psi-like abilities
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 11:12 AM	So it looks like there is a 2 to 1 consensus that, although cheesy, overchannel can be used on psi-like abilities.
Macbrea 02-01-07, 11:19 AM	By the way. Psi-like Abilities are as per Spell-Like abilities and follow similar rules. The FAQ answer on applying feats to spell-like abilites is: Does Spell Focus increase the DCs of spell-like abilities? Can I apply metamagic feats or effects to spell-like abilities? What if the feat doesn’t change the spell’s level? No. Although spell-like abilities function mechanically like spells (a fireball spell-like ability duplicates the mechanical effect of a fireball spell), they are not spells and don’t benefit from feats or other effects that specifically affect spells. This is true even if the metamagic feat effect doesn’t change the spell’s level (such as the metamagic rods from the Dungeon Master’s Guide). Sudden metamagic feats are a specific exception to this, as detailed on page 71 in Complete Arcane. Feats specifically designed to add metamagic effects to spell-like abilities appear in the Monster Manual (Empower Spell-Like Ability and Quicken Spell-Like Ability) and Complete Arcane (Heighten Spell-Like Ability and Maximize Spell-Like Ability). So, as you can see. I am not just guessing. :P
TelinArtho 02-01-07, 11:23 AM	So it looks like there is a 2 to 1 consensus that, although cheesy, overchannel can be used on psi-like abilities. Well, I didn't include in that quote above MWB's statement that he didn't agree with that use. With his vote that 2 to 1 against, not for.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 11:31 AM	If you had your mind made up, why ask?Because I think that there should be some discussion. Obviously I have an opinion, but my opinion isn't law. However a discussion can allow a consensus to be developed and the rules to be clarified. On abilities, Sliver's extra spell-likes did not get a CL bonus from her level of sorcerer they got their base as defined in the monster entry, period. It will take more justification than the ability acting like the power to convince me that it gets boosted as you suggest.Your example doesn't really apply. Of course the two CL in this example are not related. That's the same as how the CL of a druid4/wizard2 is not a cumulative CL. Abilities tied to one game element (racial spell like abilities) have a CL and those tied to another game element (levels in a casting class) have a different CL. My point is that items that grant enhancements on spell ability do not specify whether that enhancement applies to only one kind of spell casting power. If Sliver had an Orange Ioun Stone the rules are not clear if the Ioun stone grants a +1 CL on the spell like abilities. Clearly she gets a +1CL on the spell casting ability from all classes (if she had multiple casting classes). But also in my opinion Sliver gets a +1CL on spell like abilities as well. As for weapons getting damaged, try a little common sense, you are propelling a piece of easily damaged wood that when fired from a bow with more or less the same force is still a 50-50 chance of breakage on a miss let alone a hit.Unfortunately common sense doesn't apply very well or very often in dnd. In the real world you cannot wiggle your fingers and say some magic words to reliably cause a lightning bolt to shoot forward into the place you dictate. This is a question of game mechanics, not what is realistic. I think the game mechanics clearly describe the telekinetic thrust arrows being used as improvised weapons (which do not break when being used). hogarth, The manifestation of powers by a psionic character is considered a psi-like ability, as is the manifestation of powers by creatures without a psionic class (creatures with the psionic subtype, also simply called psionic creatures).All manifestation of powers is a psi-like ability. They are mechanically the same thing.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 11:38 AM	By the way. Psi-like Abilities are as per Spell-Like abilities and follow similar rules. The FAQ answer on applying feats to spell-like abilites is: So, as you can see. I am not just guessing. :P As per the quote from the psionics section of the srd, manifestation of powers and use of psi-like abilities are in fact the same thing. It appears that the distinction that lies between spells and spell like abilities is not there between powers manifest by class levels and powers manifest by psi-like abilities. It's not unreasonable but not justified either to carry the magic-psionics transparency this far and assume that all rules applying to spells and spell-like abilities equally apply to psionics and psi-like abilities. This is the same mistake that was often made with respect to psicrystals and familiars (people assumed they were the same).
hogarth 02-01-07, 11:39 AM	hogarth, All manifestation of powers is a psi-like ability. They are mechanically the same thing. All powers are psi-like abilities. That does not imply that all psi-like abilities are powers. Can we get a Venn diagram in here? ;)
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 11:42 AM	Well, I didn't include in that quote above MWB's statement that he didn't agree with that use. With his vote that 2 to 1 against, not for.Sorry to mince words, but from what I see in MWB's comments he stated that he doesn't agree with the use, but there is nothing mechanically wrong with using overchannel with psi-like abilities. i.e. The rules allow it, but he doesn't think it should be exploited by nice fair minded people.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 11:46 AM	All powers are psi-like abilities. That does not imply that all psi-like abilities are powers. Can we get a Venn diagram in here? ;) The rules do specifically say In all other ways, a psi-like ability functions just like a power. There are a few details that are different and mentioned: Manifesting time is 1 Standard action No XP cost No need to pay pp cost. None of those are relevant to this discussion in ways I can see.
Macbrea 02-01-07, 11:46 AM	So, does psionic hole effect psi-like abilities? This question was asked and I was told no it doesn't as you don't spend power points. Overchannel spends extra power points in order to raise the level of the spell. Since, you spend no power points it would appear it doesn't work the opposite way either.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 11:54 AM	So, does psionic hole effect psi-like abilities? This question was asked and I was told no it doesn't as you don't spend power points. Overchannel spends extra power points in order to raise the level of the spell. Since, you spend no power points it would appear it doesn't work the opposite way either.It's not correct to say that overchannel spends extra pp. It increases the ML (at a cost of hp). Edit: And it's not a spell. It's a power. Don't ignore the difference.
Abyssal Stalker 02-01-07, 12:00 PM	It's not really that hard to see Macbrea's point here...
Macbrea 02-01-07, 12:09 PM	The effective increase in manifester level increases the number of power points you can expend on a single power manifestation, as well as increasing all manifester level-dependent effects, such as range, duration, and overcoming power resistance Also, if you are the target of a power, the manifester of the power must spend an additional number of power points equal to your Wisdom bonus, or the power fails (all the power points spent on the power are still lost). This extra cost does not count toward the maximum power points a manifester can spend on a single power. Notice that it doens't talk about PP at all. Only Manifester levels asre mentioned. This is the distinction that I want to draw. A few items actually do talk about PP, while some talk about Manifester levels. In the case of a dorje, it says the item stores several uses of the power, ther is no mention of whether the dorje has enough pp to manifest the power several times. Now... by your very same logic Overchannel does not work with psi-like abilites because you don't spend power points. I could be mistaken but that is very much what you stated in relation to psionic hole. Therefore, the opposite should hold true also.
Macbrea 02-01-07, 12:15 PM	Sorry, need to add for clarity: Most psionic monsters have some number of psi-like abilities. These are very similar to spell-like abilities. Naturally, they are psionic and work just like powers or spells. A creature with psi-like abilities does not pay for these abilities with power points and does not pay any XP cost associated with manifesting the power the ability duplicates. Technically, the way overchannel and Psi-like abilites is written is you can activate it and take the damage. But because you cannnot spend the power points to increase the Manifester level. You get no benefit from it.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 12:20 PM	You are misunderstanding the chain of relationships. Overchannel increases ML at a cost of HP. The ML increase is just that. An increase in ML and all the ML dependent effects is the result. Overchannel doesn't give you extra pp to spend. It doesn't require you to spend extra pp to get the increase in ML. All it does is increase ML and everything that goes along with that. Psionic Hole is a bit different. It increases the PP required to use a power. Psionic Hole doesn't function of psi-like abilities because they don't require pp to use them. Overchannel does effect Psi-like abilities because it increased ML directly. Overchannel does not function by making extra pp available. The two feats and the way they effect powers are different, very much so.
Erithmu 02-01-07, 12:28 PM	Remember Sauro ML doesn't mean augment. It increases duration, but you have to spend pp to augment the powers. If Overchannel doesn't apply bonus pp, then you would just have a longer duration of the same power.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 12:34 PM	Remember Sauro ML doesn't mean augment. It increases duration, but you have to spend pp to augment the powers. If Overchannel doesn't apply bonus pp, then you would just have a longer duration of the same power.Absolutely true in the cast of most powers manifest using PP and some class ability. However in the case of Psi-Like Abilities since the ML is increased directly (at a cost of HP not PP) the nature of Psi-Like Abilities gives you a power augmented as if using a number of PP equal to the new increased ML.
Macbrea 02-01-07, 12:39 PM	That is only partially true. You have to look at each creature entry to see if it gives you the extra power. There is a statement that goes with psi-like abilies that reads. Powers that have increased effects due to augmentation include information about the effect. An asterisk indicates that the power has already been augmented by the creature’s innate ability. Powers that can’t be augmented, or that are manifested at their normal minimum level, do not contain any special notations. Resolve the effect of manifesting the power without augmentation at the creature’s given manifester level. Example: Druegar reads: 1/day—expansion, invisibility. These abilities are as the power (or spell) manifested by a psion (or sorcerer) of the duergar’s Hit Dice (minimum 3rd level) and affect only the duergar and whatever he carries. Note there is no asterisk involved in the write-up of the race. And therefore it is at Manifester level equal to it's psion level but with only the minimum number of power points added to manifest it.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 01:51 PM	Macbrea, When I first read your last comment, my chin hit the floor. The I reread the messages from the rules and I almost laughed. I must say that if your interpretation were true, then psionics as a whole would be seriously nerfed, and the whole of CoCo would have been doing things wrong for a long time. But thankfully it's not. The above quoted SRD sections indicate only that if you want to know what happens when you augment a power mentioned in a psi-like ability, look at the power. Powers which can be augmented make mention of them in the power descriptions. Also if you are looking at a creature entry and see an asterisk, then that psi-like ability is already described as being augmented (thus no need to look up the effect of augmentation). Also if the power cannot be augmented, there will be no special notations (you find that information in the power description). Finally if the ML of the creature is equal to the minimum ML necessary to manifest the power, then there will be no special notations. Let's look at an example to see if this is how it's done in the SRD. Psi-Like Abilities: At will—energy stun (electricity, 2d6, DC 15*), false sensory input (DC 15), id insinuation (two targets, DC 15*), mind thrust (ML 4th, 4d10, DC 14*), telekinetic force (275 lb., DC 15*), thought shield (power resistance 16*); 3/day—astral construct (3rd level*), body adjustment, mental barrier. Manifester level 6th. The save DCs are Charisma-based. So the Udoroot has a number of powers. We can see that all of them which can be augmented are marked. The only ones that cannot be augmented are False Sensory Input, Body Adjustment and Mental Barrier. These cannot be augmented becase they are 3rd level powers and the Udoroot doesn't have a high enough ML to augment them. What you quote above are guidelines about how to use the psi-like ability entries in the creatures mentioned in that section. Those guidelines are time saving tools to help people read the creature descriptions more easily and without need to look up every power to see if it can be augmented. In most of the monsters listed in the SRD, the work has been done for you. If the powers can be augmented, they are noted with an asterisk. The guidelines on how to read the monster entries are not rules that dictate what powers can and cannot be augmented. They are notes to help you run the monster more easily.
Macbrea 02-01-07, 02:08 PM	Hmm, I can see your arguement that overchannel just raises Manifester level of Psi-like abilities and therefore works on them. And it is a very valid argument. I don't feel we should be applying metamagic rods to psionics. They don't seem to mesh well and seem to be counter to the spell-like ability rule to use of metamagic and rods. :P Don't worry... I like to argue rules just to argue rules til we can make them look much clearer.
MindWandererB 02-01-07, 02:52 PM	Wow, I go to bed for a few hours and all hell breaks loose. To clarify my earlier statement, Telin has it right: although I can see how it would work mechanically if it were allowed (which was one of the arguments against at the time), I don't think it applies to PLAs, since it does specifically say powers manifested. As hogarth said, all powers are PLAs (and by a many-step extension, SLAs as well), but PLAs are not powers. Because metapsionics and metamagic follow slightly different rules, I would not be inclined to allow them to be transparent. If it were possible to apply a metamagic feat to psionics, then by all means, I would allow it. But since you can't use the feat transparently, you can't use the rod transparently, either. The one aspect of this argument that I would be willing to support is caster level when mentioned in non-psionic sources. For instance, I would support the orange ioun stone or a level of human paragon adding to manifester level. However, I have no strong feelings on the matter, and I will leave that argument to people who are more passionate about it. Edit: Oh, and for the record, if Overchannel were allowed to apply to PLAs, it would increase the augmentation automatically IMO, since, PLAs are automatically augmented to the maximum PP expendiuture allowed by their ML. But I don't agree that it should be allowed.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 04:43 PM	In an attempt to be persuasive, I feel it's necessary to point out that PLA's are in fact "manifested". The language is clear that when you use a PLA it is a "manifestation of powers" and that Overchannel increases ML when you "manifest a power". Psi-Like Abilities (Ps): The manifestation of powers by a psionic character is considered a psi-like ability, as is the manifestation of powers by creatures without a psionic class (creatures with the psionic subtype, also simply called psionic creatures). Usually, a psionic creature’s psi-like ability works just like the power of that name. A few psi-like abilities are unique; these are explained in the text where they are described. Psi-like abilities have no verbal, somatic, or material components, nor do they require a focus or have an XP cost (even if the equivalent power has an XP cost). The user activates them mentally. Armor never affects a psi-like ability’s use. A psi-like ability has a manifesting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability description. In all other ways, a psi-like ability functions just like a power. However, a psionic creature does not have to pay a psi-like ability’s power point cost. Psi-like abilities are subject to power resistance and to being dispelled by dispel psionics. They do not function in areas where psionics is suppressed or negated.There is clear and direct statements in the SRD that PLA's are infact powers and they are manifest.
MindWandererB 02-01-07, 05:32 PM	I have to admit that's pretty compelling, although it took me a while to find (doesn't seem to be in the Sovelior/Sage SRD). <shrug> It's unclear, so either way it's going to be a house rule of sorts. I'm indifferent, mostly because the RAI is ambigious (as it is in much of the XPH). I would like to point out that this would apply equally well to wilders, and there are probably other ways to take advantage of it as well.
hogarth 02-01-07, 05:42 PM	I have to admit that's pretty compelling, although it took me a while to find (doesn't seem to be in the Sovelior/Sage SRD). The rules also refer to "manifesting a power from a dorje". Does that mean that Overchannel should work for dorjes also? :yuck: There's nothing to it other than wait for NiQil and Pittbull to weigh in with their opinions.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 06:12 PM	(doesn't seem to be in the Sovelior/Sage SRD).It's in there. That's where I found it. Under the heading "special abilities" (half way down the page). (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/psionic.html) Edit: Anyway I think the feat has a fairly reasonable check and balance. It costs hp to use the feat. You can invest a second feat to replace the hp cost with psionic focus but only when used on powers of 3rd level or less. The effect is fairly minimal, +1 to 3 ML at a rather hefty hp cost. It looks fairly balanced to me, even if used on psi-like abilities.
SauroGrenom 02-01-07, 06:23 PM	The rules also refer to "manifesting a power from a dorje". Does that mean that Overchannel should work for dorjes also? :yuck:I would say no. Since the dorje is doing the manifesting, it would need to have the feat to effect the powers it manifests. Dorje's are objects, so they don't have feats.
MindWandererB 02-01-07, 06:23 PM	<slaps head> Right, I forgot there was content in the main Psionic heading. @hogarth: sorry, that one doesn't work. Overchannel says, "you can increase your effective manifester level by one..." Since dorjes don't care what your manifester level is, that doesn't help. However, this interpretation would imply that you could overchannel while using a power stone to improve your caster level check if it's above your ML.
NiQil 02-02-07, 12:16 AM	Since the Overchannel issue seems to be needing a decision, I will chime in on the side of saying that I do not feel that Overchannel will work with psi-like abilities. I've read over everything presented here on the subject, and that is my view. I won't get into details, since most of what I think has already been said by one or more persons. With regards to the arrows/TK question, I feel that the arrows will break normally, just as if fired from a launcher.
Macbrea 02-06-07, 09:21 AM	Odd rules question. If a creature with detect psionics concentrates on an area with a person hiding with a tattoo of chameleon running. After three rounds do they autospot that person?
TelinArtho 02-06-07, 09:23 AM	Pinpoint - not autospot.
MindWandererB 02-06-07, 01:00 PM	I concur with Telin. Three rounds of concentrating on Detect Magic (or just looking with Arcane Sight) tells you the square a magical effect is located in and, if you can actually see the source of that emanation, you can tell what is emanating what (in the case of two or more sources of magic in the same square).
Macbrea 02-06-07, 02:23 PM	It didn't quite matter in the fight, I ran because he also used misdirection. But a person with hide in plain sight tapped a tattoo of chameleon vs an individual with detect psionics. Knowing the sqare he was in doesn't help because all attacks of the creature required actually being able to target the individual. Which. Being a glowing outline doesn't allow you to target the person with total concealment. tjat wouild be glowing.
Etiquette_Gnome 02-06-07, 03:08 PM	I had been considering two seperate items for possible character concepts, and would like to know how well they would work. First, is it possible to get something like skunk musk (or other equally pungeant substance) and the like to negate the use of scent in a large area, as mentioned in the Scent special ability? Second, can Bluff be used to convince someone to surrender a fight if the bluff is along the lines of..."I can and will kill you where even the Nimbus won't save you if you don't surrender now"? Bluff is capable of making someone act as you desire for a round, and if they believe they'll survive giving the surrender motion to the arena judges, it will be quite the reasonable action on their part.
Macbrea 02-06-07, 03:12 PM	Troglodytes smell... And since, we don't allow someone to charm another character and get them to surrender. I don't think bluffing them into surrendering is going to work either.
hogarth 02-06-07, 03:12 PM	Second, can Bluff be used to convince someone to surrender a fight if the bluff is along the lines of..."I can and will kill you where even the Nimbus won't save you if you don't surrender now"? Bluff is capable of making someone act as you desire for a round, and if they believe they'll survive giving the surrender motion to the arena judges, it will be quite the reasonable action on their part. Caterane clarified that a Bluff, Suggestion, Charm, etc. to force someone to surrender/leave the arena won't end the fight.
Hirumajoe 02-06-07, 03:20 PM	Hmm... While you can't use Bluff to make someone surrender out right, could you use it to convince them to throw away their main weapon? Perhaps toss you their wand of magic missiles? Dismiss their continuing spell effect? "You do know, I actually had a Dark Priest curse your Bow while you weren't looking today. It should be bursting into flames in 3... 2... " That seems like it would fall under a 1 round action and be pretty fight altering.
hogarth 02-06-07, 03:24 PM	Hmm... While you can't use Bluff to make someone surrender out right, could you use it to convince them to throw away their main weapon? Perhaps toss you their wand of magic missiles? Dismiss their continuing spell effect? "You do know, I actually had a Dark Priest curse your Bow while you weren't looking today. It should be bursting into flames in 3... 2... " That seems like it would fall under a 1 round action and be pretty fight altering. I'd give that the +20 modifier for "way out there, almost too incredible to consider". At least. ;)
Hirumajoe 02-06-07, 04:01 PM	I'd give that the +20 modifier for "way out there, almost too incredible to consider". At least. ;) Oh definitely. It leads to an interesting character though. Human Sorcerer 3 with 18 Cha, Snake Familiar +3, Skill Focus Feat (Bluff) +3, Persausive Feat +2. Bluff check of +18 at level 3. Against a low wisdom opponent, thats almost automatic... Actually, throw in Combat Expertise and Improved Feint and your melee touch attacks will never miss again (well, almost). Edit: To turn this into an actual Oracle post, could a character continue to make Bluff checks as full round actions each round so long as they don't fail? I.e. can you control an opponents actions as long as you succeed each round? I could easily imagine a character who could auto-succeed even vs a +20 modifier against many opponents in the CoCo.
MitzaVolchenko 02-06-07, 05:48 PM	The answer when I asked about this in conjunction with pixie memory loss arrows (which Cat banned, curse him!) was 'no.' My intention with Sliver was to snipe them with memory loss arrows and then flutter down and tell them they were in the wrong arena. I truly wanted to force everyone to have to carry a wanted poster of Sliver with them as a pre-buff in order to know she was their enemy.
Maraxus 02-06-07, 10:15 PM	Do armor spikes cound as "held weapons" for Dissolving weapon? -Yes. -No. -Only if you hold no other weapons.
TheMagister 02-07-07, 03:45 AM	Oh, boy. Here we go again.
MitzaVolchenko 02-07-07, 03:46 AM	Spells, Powers, and Abilities: Certain spells and powers (Planar Ally, Animate Dead, Dominate, Animate Object, etc) or Abilities (Rebuke undead, etc) allow a character to summon, create allies, or control allies. These allies will always require a share of your XP and gold, and on top of that the regular xp and/or gold price for acquiring them in the first place, if any. In case of the Animate Dead spell you need to acquire a corpse first (which is normally be tied to a Quest or Miniquest unless you can get the body in another way, eg. buy a horse and kill it). All these allies use the abilities presented in their entry, modified by whatever the spell does (eg. +2 dex for skeletons). The Create Spawn ability of some undead creates minions who will use the unmodified MM entry and its CR to determine the CA. Special: a spellcaster may create a Homunkulus. FIX THIS! Animate Object is a 1rnd/lvl spell just like the normal summon monster spells. If we don't charge xp/gp for a summoned celestial badger and count it against cap, then we can't charge for the kitchen sink. Also, if you dominate your opponent, just what can you command them to do? How much gp/xp do they count against you for? The spell lasts for days...can I dominate my local dwarf berzerker and keep them for the 3FC? Is ordering them to surrender "self-destructive"? This section has needed clarification and refinement for ages...just thought I'd toss it up one more time.
Abyssal Stalker 02-07-07, 04:44 AM	Holy crap. I've never realized that I can have a dominated ally for Jonathon. But, I think the rule refers to "permanent" allies - for example a permanently animated kitchen sink. On the other hand, I can't right now recall how Varjo's spawns were handled. They are a good example how things have been handled.
hogarth 02-07-07, 08:20 AM	FIX THIS! Animate Object is a 1rnd/lvl spell just like the normal summon monster spells. If we don't charge xp/gp for a summoned celestial badger and count it against cap, then we can't charge for the kitchen sink. From context, I assumed that it meant "Animate Object (made permanent with the Permanency spell)".
Zevox 02-07-07, 08:26 AM	Holy crap. I've never realized that I can have a dominated ally for Jonathon. But, I think the rule refers to "permanent" allies - for example a permanently animated kitchen sink. On the other hand, I can't right now recall how Varjo's spawns were handled. They are a good example how things have been handled. While you're right abut Animate Objects being able to be made permanent, Dominate is still a problem - its duration is only days, and it can't be made permanent. We don't have any rule which would tell you how long you could keep such an ally for in our time, so its kind of silly to say you can have it, but we don't have any information like that. Oh, and for Varjo's Spawns, thats not really the same - those are inherently permanent, so no problem with keeping them. Zevox
Abyssal Stalker 02-07-07, 08:40 AM	While you're right abut Animate Objects being able to be made permanent, Dominate is still a problem - its duration is only days, and it can't be made permanent. We don't have any rule which would tell you how long you could keep such an ally for in our time, so its kind of silly to say you can have it, but we don't have any information like that. Oh, and for Varjo's Spawns, thats not really the same - those are inherently permanent, so no problem with keeping them. Zevox Well, Domination has a duration of 5 days in the case of Vampire Spawns - so it should be OK to have dominated allies. 3FC takes only a day and if you're able to establish the domination, I don't see a reason why it wouldn't be possible to strenghten it every now and then. You got me a bit wrong with the spawns. I meant a situation where a shadow kills someone and the subject rises as a spawn during the fight. I know this has happened, but I can't remember if Varjo was able to keep those spawns for the 3FC. The same kind of situation would rise if Jonathon dominates his enemy's ally. The duration is 5 days, so would he be able to keep the dominated ally for the 3FC or not? So this actually is quite the same with the shadow's ability. Another question is if this would affect Jonathon's rewards for the fight? I think it shouldn't, because it's basically a racial feature and counted in his LA. And what if I dominated someone and brought him to the fight? It would still be a racial ally (and therefore different from using the spell).
Maraxus 02-07-07, 08:44 AM	This is nothing that should be put into a rule, but I'd like to mention, that vampires can easyil keep somone dominated. The duration is about to run out, then they simply use the ability again and again untill the target fail a save, and the duration is refreshed. I guess this is one exreamly important part of their LA+8. But how would that work for people that can't use the ability an unlimited number of times per day? I agree, it's hard to judge.
TelinArtho 02-07-07, 10:19 AM	Since there's a Thrallherd competing in the arena, I have a thrall-related question. Here's what the rules have to say about Class Feature Allies: My question is: if character A is a thrallherd who brings his thrall to a fight against character B, does character B gain increased rewards for the fight? Telin is trying to convince me that "not requiring a share of xp or gold" implies that no one else gets increased xp or gold as well. However, all the above quotation says is that character A's rewards are not reduced -- it doesn't say anything about character B's rewards not being increased. Hi Caterane, I have a couple of questions: 1) Do Automatic Skill Packages (e.g. Political Career) apply on quests and miniquests? [No] 2) The rules state that a thrallherd bringing his thrall to a fight does not reduce his rewards. Does the thrall increase the opponent's rewards? [Yes] Cheers, hogarth So Cat has surfaced to give an answer to this question. Anyone who has had a fight against a thrallherd may apply for additional gold and xp in the character changes thread. Please include the link to the fight in question, and also PM the Pitlord involved.
Etiquette_Gnome 02-07-07, 10:24 AM	I remember asking a similar question in regards to other day/level duration spells/effects, where despite the fact that I could cast it the day prior to the start of my 3FC, I would end up having to cast it again that day and have it count against my spells for the day. AKA, a level 5 cleric has to have one of his 3rd level spells for the day counted off if he wants to start with a Deeper Darkness pendant for the 3FC, despite the five day duration. I myself feel that it should be allowed to be a part of your 'gear', being able to prebuff as much as a day or two before the day of your fight cycle.
TelinArtho 02-07-07, 02:13 PM	So Cat has surfaced to give an answer to this question. Anyone who has had a fight against a thrallherd may apply for additional gold and xp in the character changes thread. Please include the link to the fight in question, and also PM the Pitlord involved. Relanex (Macbrea) vs Legion (spasheridan) vs Kilpquabjeg (hogarth) [Hunter] The above fight has been fixed to accommodate for the above ruling. hogarth and Macbrea - go ahead and alter your sheets to account for this change. Also - it might be helpful to link this post.
hogarth 02-07-07, 02:18 PM	The above fight has been fixed to accommodate for the above ruling. hogarth and Macbrea - go ahead and alter your sheets to account for this change. Also - it might be helpful to link this post. Actually, it's still incorrect -- you forgot Kilpquabjeg's horse. It was prebuffed, although it neglected to make an appearance in the battle.
TelinArtho 02-07-07, 02:25 PM	Ah well - it has been adjusted for that too then. Strange that it wasn't there in the first place...
Caterane 02-08-07, 08:06 AM	The Oracle has become the Courtroom of Gladius because Prisonlords wants to have control over it and I haven't figured out how to move posts. Please continue over there. Thanks.