Post/Author/DateTime	Post
wepv2404 01-17-08, 03:50 PM	the way im reading this when i cast call lightning with born of the three thunders on it then im dazed for a round. following that i can spend standard actions to fire stunning tripping bolts of lightning and sonic. is this correct? or am i dazed everytime i fire a bolt?
TheCobra 01-17-08, 03:59 PM	Hard to say. By the way the feat is worded, it doesn't seem they were expecting anyone to try this. The spell supposedly ends with a thunderclap, which causes the stunning and tripping.
rironin 01-17-08, 04:02 PM	It's a tiny bit dicey because of the feat's wording: "Channeling the three thunders is costly, though, and you are automatically dazed for 1 round after doing so." One could argue that every time you call the lightning you are "Channeling the three thunders," but personally I think that's a case of relying too much on fluff to adjudicate the rules. The way I read the feat, the dazing part should come in upon casting the spell. Even though call lightning is a bit unique as one of the few [Electricity] spells out there that isn't instantaneous, I don't think there's any need to daze you for longer than the normal 1 round. At first, this seemed a bit brokenated to me, but really? Nah. With most combats lasting just a few rounds, the fact that call lightning is comparatively low damage, and the fact that you have to use standard actions on subsequent rounds, I say have at'em. Stunning and knocking down your enemies is a powerful effect (especially if you can do it round after round with call lightning), but I still think being dazed for the round will make up for it. TheCobra: Good point, I glossed right over that. I still say it's a case of the writer getting a bit too flowery with the description, which certainly makes the feat sound cool, but doesn't do as good a job at clarifying the rules. I think I'd still let webv2404 have a go at this if it were me DMing. I'd let the effects apply to every bolt called. I would, however, reserve the right to make changes later if this tactic proved to be more effective than a 3rd level spell with this feat "should" be. :)
wepv2404 01-17-08, 04:09 PM	yea its all the fluffy text mixed with rules thats making it a tough call..i figured i'd come here to make sure i wasnt just readign it the way i wanted to. thx!
Roelandt 01-18-08, 08:50 PM	Yes. You would be dazed everytime you shoot. The idea of the spell is that the backlash of the sonic element of the metamagic dazes you, the caster. So, yeah. Every time, or the feat becomes illogical. Storme
JamesMaissen 01-19-08, 12:23 AM	the way im reading this when i cast call lightning with born of the three thunders on it then im dazed for a round. following that i can spend standard actions to fire stunning tripping bolts of lightning and sonic. is this correct? or am i dazed everytime i fire a bolt? When you cast a born of three thunders spell you are in effect casting daze on yourself with a 1 round duration. -James
Jaxgaret 01-19-08, 04:22 AM	The RAW reading that I am seeing with a Born of the Three Thundersed Call Lightning is that the Daze occurs the first round when the spell is cast, all of the subsequent bolts deal 50% sonic and 50% electricity damage, and when the spell concludes [at the end of the Call Lightning's duration], any bolt that damages an enemy during that final round of its duration has the additional stunning/knocking prone effect. I'm not sure I see how the RAW on this could be ruled otherwise; would someone care to explain?
rironin 01-20-08, 01:17 PM	The RAW reading that I am seeing with a Born of the Three Thundersed Call Lightning is that the Daze occurs the first round when the spell is cast, all of the subsequent bolts deal 50% sonic and 50% electricity damage, and when the spell concludes [at the end of the Call Lightning's duration], any bolt that damages an enemy during that final round of its duration has the additional stunning/knocking prone effect. I'm not sure I see how the RAW on this could be ruled otherwise; would someone care to explain?I think the only speculation regarding the rules comes from the fact that the rules as written are pretty fluffy. Why would the thunderclap only affect those damaged during the final round of the spell's duration? The exact wording is "the spell concludes with a mighty thunderclap that stuns all creatures that take damage from the spell for 1 round..." That would imply that after the spell "concludes," a thunderclap occurs which affects everyone you damaged with any lightning bolt you called during the spell. I think that's kind of silly, myself. People hit by the previous bolts at the beginning of the casting stand around until a late thunderclap knocks them over much later? I understand fully that my discussion diverges from the RAW here, but I think the fact that the RAW produces some odd results - including my point above, and the question as to whether "channeling the three thunders" means casting the spell or every time you fire/call/create a spell effect using this feat. It's my personal opinion that the results are so odd, it's unlikely that the writers of the feat were thinking of a spell like call lightning when the feat was written. There are some other spells, and I'm sure many of them were introduced after this feat was written, that might produce odd effects, or at least be weird/useless by RAW, such as reactive energy shields like an electrical version of fire shield. This would either knock people prone and stun them after the full duration of the spell ran out (useless, as either you or your enemies would probably be dead by then) or knock down and stun everyone who attacks you, immediately. The latter option seems a bit overpowered to me, since it's not something that the caster has to spend standard actions ever turn on to create like with call lightning. In light of reactive spells like these, I might scrap the whole thing as the DM and houserule an additional clause into the feat itself, so that it reads "When you cast a spell with either the electricity descriptor or the sonic descriptor that deals hit point damage and has an instantaneous duration, you can declare that spell to be a spell of the three thunders." I just don't feel like using the pure RAW interpretation, as it makes for a bizarre effect that is not only illogical but not very useful to casters anyways.
Jaxgaret 01-20-08, 07:48 PM	Why would the thunderclap only affect those damaged during the final round of the spell's duration? The exact wording is "the spell concludes with a mighty thunderclap that stuns all creatures that take damage from the spell for 1 round..." That would imply that after the spell "concludes," a thunderclap occurs which affects everyone you damaged with any lightning bolt you called during the spell. The actual wording is "the spell concludes with a mighty thunderclap that stuns all creatures that take damage from the spell for 1 round". Not took damage, past tense. Take damage, present tense, during this last round of the spell's duration. Thus my RAW reading of it still stands.
wepv2404 01-20-08, 11:36 PM	i have a hard time seeing where the stun only happens after the spell ends since it doesnt say they get knocked prone after it ends... so they get knocked prone when they take damage then they get stunned after the spell is over? i tend to ignore the last sentance because it is very fluffy and doesnt actually make any sense. the feat says any creature damaged makes a save vs stun and prone...and then says the spell concludes with some descriptive text that stuns creatures...i feel like the last sentence should be in the paragraph BEFORE the prereq's and rules.
wepv2404 01-20-08, 11:42 PM	The actual wording is "the spell concludes with a mighty thunderclap that stuns all creatures that take damage from the spell for 1 round". Not took damage, past tense. Take damage, present tense, during this last round of the spell's duration. Thus my RAW reading of it still stands. but the creatures take damage while the spell is running..THEN it ends when my turn ends...so they TOOK damage..the spell isnt over until my turn is over so its a new initiative count and thus past tense..by that reading they cant be stunned at all. even instant duration spells are finished before the spell has "concluded" and thus they TOOK damage. they arent taking damage after its over unless its an effect that lingers..and then the spell isnt over...so if they dont get stunned the same time they take damage they never get stunned...and thus the feat doesnt do anything..
Jaxgaret 01-21-08, 12:12 AM	The thunderclap lasts the entirety of the final round of the duration of the spell.
wepv2404 01-21-08, 12:19 AM	The thunderclap lasts the entirety of the final round of the duration of the spell. where are you getting that ruling from? is that your opinion or is it errata'd somewhere? and that still doesnt cover the knocked prone part of the feat. it doesnt say the spell concludes with a thunderclap that stuns and knocks prone enemies..it says it stuns them(iirc my book isnt infront of me right now)
Jaxgaret 01-21-08, 12:55 AM	where are you getting that ruling from? is that your opinion or is it errata'd somewhere? It's a literal, RAW reading of the feat. and that still doesnt cover the knocked prone part of the feat. it doesnt say the spell concludes with a thunderclap that stuns and knocks prone enemies..it says it stuns them(iirc my book isnt infront of me right now) Creatures that fail their save and are Stunned by a spell modified by the Born of the Three Thunders feat then have to make an additional save or be knocked prone.
rironin 01-21-08, 10:11 AM	The actual wording is "the spell concludes with a mighty thunderclap that stuns all creatures that take damage from the spell for 1 round". Not took damage, past tense. Take damage, present tense, during this last round of the spell's duration. Thus my RAW reading of it still stands.What? Firstly, I'm aware of the actual wording... I quoted that sentence too. Either you are deliberately perverting the meaning of the sentence, or you do not correctly understand the way the sentence is constructed. I don't mean to be terribly snarky here, but this is one of the few cases where I am absolutely certain you are simply not reading it correctly. I am not an English major, but I'll do my best. The tenses you are referring to don't make any sense, at all. In this case the word "take" is part of a clause that modifies "all creatures" - the fact that the word "take" is also the present tense of the verb doesn't magically alter the meaning of the sentence, and honestly, you should know that. Every time you cast a spell of the three thunders, all creatures that take damage from the spell feel the effects of the thunderclap. That's it. It's very simple... after the spell damages things, you look at each creature on the battlefield and you ask yourself "Did this creature take damage from the spell?" If the answer is yes, they feel the effects of the thunderclap. There is nothing at all to do with "Did this creature take damage from the spell during the last round of the spell because I'm using the present tense of the word 'take'?" involved. It's English. "All people that take the bus need to pay a fare." Not just the people who take the last run of the day, not people who take the pus at two minutes to midnight. This sentence describes everyone who takes the bus, with no modifier whatsoever on when they take it. If someone came up to me and said, "Hey, do I owe my local public transportation service a bus fare? I'm not sure," I would ask them if they took the bus at some point. If the answer is yes, regardless of what time it was when they took the bus, then I'd say they owed a bus fare. They don't have to be on the bus right now. Please, please, please tell me this is enough explanation to convince most literate people of the meaning of this sentence.The thunderclap lasts the entirety of the final round of the duration of the spell.You are making this up. wepv2404 already asked you where you got it from, so I'll just respond to your answer. It is not a literal RAW reading of the feat. The feat says nothing, nothing, nothing about the damage dealt during the entirety of the last round of the spell. The word "take" does not magically imply this. See above for why. If you want to talk about RAW, give me a quote from a book with the words "entirety" or "duration" or "final round" that has to do with this specific feat. Otherwise, you are literally making things up. If this little rant does nothing to advance the argument, I'm pretty much done, Jaxgaret. We are already pretty much at the edge of arguable space, here. If you disagree with me at this point, that's fine - my only advice going forward would be to try to read everything you can in daily life. Perhaps eventually it will become obvious that the meaning of those sentences is different than you suppose. wepv2404, call it like you see it.