Energy Claw hit points? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Energy Claw hit points? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
aotrscommander
03-12-07, 10:33 AM Energy Claw (Complete Psionic p86) seems to imply you can attack the claw (as it says it takes 1 1/2 damage from some elemental attacks). But, unless I'm being really stupid, I can't see where it tells you what the AC and hit points of the claw are. Anybody know it there's a clarification or errata?
Shado
03-12-07, 11:47 AM You can't attack a natural weapon. Even one obtained psionically.
aotrscommander
03-12-07, 12:34 PM You can't attack a natural weapon. Even one obtained psionically.

Energy Claw (Psn/Wld power 7) isn't a natural weapon. It's more like a Bigby's [Insert adjective] Hand; the Effect is "10' Claw" and the range is Medium.

It references in the energy damage section that, for example, a claw of cold energy "takes 1-1/2 times the normal damage from fire". But it fails to say anywhere I can could see about what hit points it has (or for that matter, if it has an AC).

So either a) I'm stupid and missing something obvious, despite reading the power description several times, b) there's some generality in psionics rules that would apply to this that I haven't twigged or c) it's a bog-up by WotC.

I have my ideas which out of three it is...(We are talking about Complete Psionic after all...)

I was wondering if anyone had got anything for CustServe or any errata (etc.) to clear this up.
Red12
03-12-07, 12:57 PM (We are talking about Complete Psionic after all...)
... or any errata (etc.) to clear this up.
Thats whats funny, cause the Complete Psionic errata will come out in the next psionic supplement (if there will be another one).

As to your question:

I don't believe there has been any precedent of something made out of energy having a hardness or AC. And normally, I would dismiss this worry because it has to touch attack, successfully grapple, and can be dispelled.

However, like you say, the wording "takes 1-1/2 damage from X energy type..." is very disconcerting, as there is absolutely no mention of stats for the energy claw. (personally, I think this is more Conjuration has to have everything" bunk. Clearly a psychokinetic power.)

You could, however, re-write it so that the energy claw deals x1.5 damage to energy creatures of that subtype... but thats a bit of a stretch I think.

Quite honestly, I baffled.
aotrscommander
03-12-07, 01:18 PM Thats whats funny, cause the Complete Psionic errata will come out in the next psionic supplement (if there will be another one).

That's what I was afraid of.

I must admit, that the one thing I'm most disapointed with Wizards about. After years of releasing errata when it was required, they suddenly completely stopped (which is a shame considering that the newer books have more errors).

I'd email CustServe but I have done so in the past and not heard back from them (on issues like Sarcophagus of Stone in Spell Compednium thta was missing half it's details!).
Probably end up doing it anyway, though, in the vain hope I might get a responce.

As to your question:

I don't believe there has been any precedent of something made out of energy having a hardness or AC. And normally, I would dismiss this worry because it has to touch attack, successfully grapple, and can be dispelled.

However, like you say, the wording "takes 1-1/2 damage from X energy type..." is very disconcerting, as there is absolutely no mention of stats for the energy claw. (personally, I think this is more Conjuration has to have everything" bunk. Clearly a psychokinetic power.)

My guess is that it was supposed to work like a Bigby's Hand spell (since they're force and you can whack those) and either they changed it at the last minute and forgot to take out those sentences or just forgot to add the paragraph.

You could, however, re-write it so that the energy claw deals x1.5 damage to energy creatures of that subtype... but thats a bit of a stretch I think.

I agree. That would mean you're doing 1.5 damage to something that already take 1.5 damage from the energy type. (Which, though I guess with D&D multiplication system comes out at double damage). But that's a very odd way of putting it if that's what they mean.

Quite honestly, I baffled.

Well, at least it's not just me, then, or something that's cropped up frequently...!
Red12
03-12-07, 02:26 PM That's what I was afraid of.

I must admit, that the one thing I'm most disapointed with Wizards about. After years of releasing errata when it was required, they suddenly completely stopped (which is a shame considering that the newer books have more errors).

I agree. Although it may just be my "jaded" view when it comes to this, the current trend says we'll have to wait for another book. Of course, they may just surprise us and release it on the website, but what's sad is that it would BE a surprise.

I'd email CustServe but I have done so in the past and not heard back from them (on issues like Sarcophagus of Stone in Spell Compednium thta was missing half it's details!).
Probably end up doing it anyway, though, in the vain hope I might get a responce.

I never seem to get a response from CustServe, but I suppose its worth a shot.

My guess is that it was supposed to work like a Bigby's Hand spell (since they're force and you can whack those) and either they changed it at the last minute and forgot to take out those sentences or just forgot to add the paragraph.
That works, I think. Just add the sentence:
"This power works as a Bigby's Grasping Hand, except as noted here." And I think it would work fine.

I agree. That would mean you're doing 1.5 damage to something that already take 1.5 damage from the energy type. (Which, though I guess with D&D multiplication system comes out at double damage). But that's a very odd way of putting it if that's what they mean.
Indeed, but now that I think about it, I can't remember a creature with the [ACID] or [ELECTRIC] Subtype. Just with the way the power is written, that would be the next best interpretation without *adding* anything to the power as written.

Well, at least it's not just me, then, or something that's cropped up frequently...!

When it comes to editing errors, its never just you. :P
Deekin
03-12-07, 04:10 PM Directing the claw to change targets is a standard action. It always attacks from your direction and does not get a flanking bonus or help a combatant get one. When first manifested, the claw has as many hit points as you do.
The claw uses your saving throws, and it has an Armor Class of 20 (+10 natural). It cannot enter the area of a null psionics field and is immune to spells or powers except those that deal damage. It is immune to damage from the chosen energy type.

When they pulled it from minds eye, they left this part out.
aotrscommander
03-12-07, 06:47 PM Ah haaa! So it is just sloppy cut and pasting, exactly what they did with Stone Sarcpohagus!

Right, thanks Deekin, I'll amend that right away!

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
aotrscommander 03-12-07, 10:33 AM	Energy Claw (Complete Psionic p86) seems to imply you can attack the claw (as it says it takes 1 1/2 damage from some elemental attacks). But, unless I'm being really stupid, I can't see where it tells you what the AC and hit points of the claw are. Anybody know it there's a clarification or errata?
Shado 03-12-07, 11:47 AM	You can't attack a natural weapon. Even one obtained psionically.
aotrscommander 03-12-07, 12:34 PM	You can't attack a natural weapon. Even one obtained psionically. Energy Claw (Psn/Wld power 7) isn't a natural weapon. It's more like a Bigby's [Insert adjective] Hand; the Effect is "10' Claw" and the range is Medium. It references in the energy damage section that, for example, a claw of cold energy "takes 1-1/2 times the normal damage from fire". But it fails to say anywhere I can could see about what hit points it has (or for that matter, if it has an AC). So either a) I'm stupid and missing something obvious, despite reading the power description several times, b) there's some generality in psionics rules that would apply to this that I haven't twigged or c) it's a bog-up by WotC. I have my ideas which out of three it is...(We are talking about Complete Psionic after all...) I was wondering if anyone had got anything for CustServe or any errata (etc.) to clear this up.
Red12 03-12-07, 12:57 PM	(We are talking about Complete Psionic after all...) ... or any errata (etc.) to clear this up. Thats whats funny, cause the Complete Psionic errata will come out in the next psionic supplement (if there will be another one). As to your question: I don't believe there has been any precedent of something made out of energy having a hardness or AC. And normally, I would dismiss this worry because it has to touch attack, successfully grapple, and can be dispelled. However, like you say, the wording "takes 1-1/2 damage from X energy type..." is very disconcerting, as there is absolutely no mention of stats for the energy claw. (personally, I think this is more Conjuration has to have everything" bunk. Clearly a psychokinetic power.) You could, however, re-write it so that the energy claw deals x1.5 damage to energy creatures of that subtype... but thats a bit of a stretch I think. Quite honestly, I baffled.
aotrscommander 03-12-07, 01:18 PM	Thats whats funny, cause the Complete Psionic errata will come out in the next psionic supplement (if there will be another one). That's what I was afraid of. I must admit, that the one thing I'm most disapointed with Wizards about. After years of releasing errata when it was required, they suddenly completely stopped (which is a shame considering that the newer books have more errors). I'd email CustServe but I have done so in the past and not heard back from them (on issues like Sarcophagus of Stone in Spell Compednium thta was missing half it's details!). Probably end up doing it anyway, though, in the vain hope I might get a responce. As to your question: I don't believe there has been any precedent of something made out of energy having a hardness or AC. And normally, I would dismiss this worry because it has to touch attack, successfully grapple, and can be dispelled. However, like you say, the wording "takes 1-1/2 damage from X energy type..." is very disconcerting, as there is absolutely no mention of stats for the energy claw. (personally, I think this is more Conjuration has to have everything" bunk. Clearly a psychokinetic power.) My guess is that it was supposed to work like a Bigby's Hand spell (since they're force and you can whack those) and either they changed it at the last minute and forgot to take out those sentences or just forgot to add the paragraph. You could, however, re-write it so that the energy claw deals x1.5 damage to energy creatures of that subtype... but thats a bit of a stretch I think. I agree. That would mean you're doing 1.5 damage to something that already take 1.5 damage from the energy type. (Which, though I guess with D&D multiplication system comes out at double damage). But that's a very odd way of putting it if that's what they mean. Quite honestly, I baffled. Well, at least it's not just me, then, or something that's cropped up frequently...!
Red12 03-12-07, 02:26 PM	That's what I was afraid of. I must admit, that the one thing I'm most disapointed with Wizards about. After years of releasing errata when it was required, they suddenly completely stopped (which is a shame considering that the newer books have more errors). I agree. Although it may just be my "jaded" view when it comes to this, the current trend says we'll have to wait for another book. Of course, they may just surprise us and release it on the website, but what's sad is that it would BE a surprise. I'd email CustServe but I have done so in the past and not heard back from them (on issues like Sarcophagus of Stone in Spell Compednium thta was missing half it's details!). Probably end up doing it anyway, though, in the vain hope I might get a responce. I never seem to get a response from CustServe, but I suppose its worth a shot. My guess is that it was supposed to work like a Bigby's Hand spell (since they're force and you can whack those) and either they changed it at the last minute and forgot to take out those sentences or just forgot to add the paragraph. That works, I think. Just add the sentence: "This power works as a Bigby's Grasping Hand, except as noted here." And I think it would work fine. I agree. That would mean you're doing 1.5 damage to something that already take 1.5 damage from the energy type. (Which, though I guess with D&D multiplication system comes out at double damage). But that's a very odd way of putting it if that's what they mean. Indeed, but now that I think about it, I can't remember a creature with the [ACID] or [ELECTRIC] Subtype. Just with the way the power is written, that would be the next best interpretation without adding anything to the power as written. Well, at least it's not just me, then, or something that's cropped up frequently...! When it comes to editing errors, its never just you. :P
Deekin 03-12-07, 04:10 PM	Directing the claw to change targets is a standard action. It always attacks from your direction and does not get a flanking bonus or help a combatant get one. When first manifested, the claw has as many hit points as you do. The claw uses your saving throws, and it has an Armor Class of 20 (+10 natural). It cannot enter the area of a null psionics field and is immune to spells or powers except those that deal damage. It is immune to damage from the chosen energy type. When they pulled it from minds eye, they left this part out.
aotrscommander 03-12-07, 06:47 PM	Ah haaa! So it is just sloppy cut and pasting, exactly what they did with Stone Sarcpohagus! Right, thanks Deekin, I'll amend that right away!