The only "*mancer" classes/PrCs in WotC's 3.X products are Arachnomancer, Cerebremancer, Dread Necromancer, Entropomancer, Geomancer, Noctumancer, Silver Pyromancer, and True Necromancer. There are none including the word "bio".. Perhaps the class your friend mentioned is from Dragon Magazine or a 3PP?
I recognize the encounter setup from an AP, so in this particular case I doubt the DM was specifically trying to target the party's weaknesses (unless he created an encounter that was very similar by chance).
If the encounter was from that AP, I'll note that the AP in question includes some parts that can be very rough on the survival of the PCs (especially if the players are new), while other parts are fairly easy.
Hopefully the OP's group makes it through to the end :)
I don't think the 1 Round cast time changes the duration of a spell in any way, whereas you seem to think it does.
I'll just reply to this one point, in order to clarify my view :)
To me, a spell's duration begins when the spell's effect begins. For most spells (such as those with a swift or standard casting time), this is immediately after the action used to cast.
However, spells with the "1 round" casting time don't come into effect immediately after the action. Instead, the rules state that they come into effect just before your next turn. So that's when the duration begins, as that's when the effect begins.
One reason why I believe this is the case is because you can lose the spell if you lose concentration between your turn ending and the spell's effect beginning, indicating that the casting isn't complete until that point:
When you begin a spell that takes 1 round or longer to cast, you must continue the concentration from the current round to just before your turn in the next round (at least). If you lose concentration before the casting is complete, you lose the spell.
That was one use. Some other options:
- You could use it to move 5 ft away without provoking, then take a move action (also not provoking, unless the enemy has reach), before taking a standard action of some kind.
- You could use it to move normally to within 10 ft of a creature with reach, then move 5 ft closer without provoking, before attacking. Normally, you'd have to provoke in order to get adjacent.
Okay, thank you. In my view, that's not the intended behaviour, but it certainly clarifies your position. Since we run these types of spells completely differently, I don't think we'll be able to agree, so I'll stop posting here and leave others to make up their own minds :)
Edit: With standard action summoning the creature would come right away on the same turn, since the spell would no longer use the special rule for spells with a "1 round" casting time. Thus, it would act immediately, even before your move action if so desired.
So, in your view, the summoned monster, once it appears, gets to act twice before an enemy can act? When it appears (just before your initiative count on round 2), then again on your round 2?
If that's not what you're saying, then please state how you see it working, if the caster acts at, say, initiative 20 and the enemy at initiative 10.
Are: Therein lies why you are getting it wrong. While, yes, the effect actually occurs in game round 2, for the caster who hasn't acted in game round 2, the effect occurs within the confines of that character's first round. So when the caster goes in round 2, two rounds of duration have been consumed, even though both called bolts occur in "game round 2".
No, for the very reason you state in your next paragraph.
Rounds of duration, effects, etc. are based upon when they occur in the initiative count wholly separate from the "game round".
Exactly. If we assume (for the sake of argument, since 20.1 could be misinterpreted) that initiative count 21 occurs just before your initative count of 20, then the spell's duration begins on initiative count 21. Because, the spell comes into effect just before your next turn.
The first round of its duration extends from initiative count 21 that turn, past the caster's initiative count of 20, until initiative count 21 on the following round. And so on.
Can I ask how you (HangarFlying and mplindustries) handle summoning spells? Say, any summon monster spell cast by a 10th level wizard in round 1?
By my interpretation, the summoned monster will be able to act 10 times (during rounds 2-11), while by your interpretation it seems that it can only act 9 times (during rounds 2-10, since you say the duration begins the round of casting).
No, round 1 of the spell's duration is the round in which it comes into effect. For a spell with a "1 round" casting time, the spell's duration begins just before your turn in round 2. The duration doesn't begin at the end of your previous turn.
Going by your count, I can see the issue. You are thinking the spell comes into effect immediately after your initiative on round 2 (20.1), but it actually comes into effect immediately before (19.9).
No, initiative 20.1 is immediately before 20, just like initiative 21 is before 20. That's why I wrote it before, rather than after..
Sure, let's use real initiative counts. The way I see it:
Round 1 wrote:
Initiative 20 - Druid spends full round action to cast the spell.
Round 2 wrote:
Round 3 wrote:
Are: what are you talking about? What is this "remove one round of duration"?
I'm referring specifically to the fact that you and mplindustries seem to suggest that the "first" in the spell's wording "each round after the first" applies to the round in which the spell is cast, rather than to the spell's first round of duration (which, in the example given, is round 2, since the spell comes into effect just before your initiative count during round 2).
I don't see how it's possible to suggest that "each round after the first" applies to the casting round, without also suggesting that the spell's duration begins in that round (which it doesn't).
Tommaso Gollini wrote:
Well, consider a spell like fireball, for instance. It has no static bonus, only the 1d6 per caster level.
At 1d6, empowered gives results of 1-9, while maximized always gives the result of 6.
At 10d6, empowered similarly gives results of 15-90, while maximized always gives the result of 60.
The average here is slightly higher for maximized, but the average isn't really the point. The point of casting it maximized is for situations where you don't want to risk rolling low, while empowered still has that risk.
Empowered applies +50% to the variable of the spell only
This is not correct, as per FAQ:
Don't stop after the first sentence of the spell. In paragraph two, after explaining what it means by the "immediately" for the first "free" bolt, the text goes on to say you can only call additional bolts as a standard action "each round after the first":
You need not call a bolt of lightning immediately; other actions, even spellcasting, can be performed first. Each round after the first you may use a standard action (concentrating on the spell) to call a bolt. You may call a total number of bolts equal to your caster level (maximum 10 bolts).
I totally disagree here. The first round is the round you're casting the spell. You get a free bolt in round one (i.e. immediately before your turn). Then, on the second round, you can call down a lightning bolt as a standard action.
Spell-durations don't begin while you're casting the spell, so I don't see any way the text can possibly refer to the round of casting.
Besides, if it worked that way, why would the text even say "each round after the first"? It would have been easier (and less confusing) to simply say "each round".
In my opinion, the purpose of the text "each round after the first" is specifically to prevent 2 bolts within such a short time-span (just before your initiative count, then on your initiative count). Granted, it wouldn't be overpowering to allow the double-bolt, considering the spell is fairly weak either way, but I believe that's how it works as written.
Round 2 is the first round of the spell's duration, and the spell says you can call a bolt as a standard action "each round after the first". Since this is the first round, you can't use a standard action to call a bolt.
The drunken master ability doesn't grant a 5-ft-step. Rather, it grants the ability to move 5 ft without provoking AoOs (while seemingly equal, it's never called a 5-ft-step in the ability). So you can definitely use it during a turn in which you've already moved (or where you want to move afterwards).
If you couldn't combine it with a move, then the ability wouldn't grant anything you couldn't already do with a normal 5-ft-step.
To that, I'd rule that it would mimic the creature/ability in question. If the snake's venom says the DC is Constitution based, then it'd be 10 + 1/2 level + Constitution. If that elephant's trample says it's Strength based, then it'd be 10 + 1/2 level + Strength.
This seems to be the most logical way to rule it. I'll use this method for my games :)
I watched all of this year's World Championship match, and the commentators frequently mentioned that top-level GMs would almost immediately have 1-3 moves in mind that would be good in the situation, and then they would spend time thinking through which of those would be best.
I'd say that the first part of that (instantly recognizing a good move) is Wisdom-based, while the second part (analyzing each move before deciding) would be Intelligence-based.
In addition to that aspect, obviously knowing openings and the theory behind them, plus the theory of end game positions, would be Intelligence-based.
To me, that argument makes it even more unreasonable to homebrew an improved version of animate dead. After all, if the spell is already stronger, why make it even more powerful? :)
That said, I do agree that create undead is a relatively weaker spell in optimal circumstances, but at the same time it doesn't require the caster to find non-humanoid bodies in order to achieve stronger minions (as animate dead does).
I have only one request: Please include a sentence for each archetype stating which abilities that archetype replaces or alters.
It's pretty time consuming to have to read all of each archetype's abilities to figure out which archetypes replace something I don't want to lose. A single sentence would make it a lot easier to quickly skim past those archetypes, and only focus on those that would be suitable.
If you take no damage, you don't risk being poisoned. If you take half damage, you can be poisoned as normal.
I thought there was a FAQ entry to the effect of not suffering any "rider effects" if you took no damage from an attack, but I can't find it now. It's possible it was simply a message board post by one of the developers.
You should certainly not let him have a homebrew animate dead that creates ghouls. If for no other reason, then because the existing spell that creates ghouls (create undead) is a 6th-level spell, while animate dead is a 3rd/4th-level spell (depending on class).
Ah. Well, I expect the biggest difference would be that she's now mortal, and will in time grow old and weak before dying due to age. Coming to terms with that could be troublesome for someone who has been immortal, especially if her new life-span is akin to a human's in length.
Of more immediate concern would be her need for food and sleep to survive, which is something Outsiders don't have to worry about. At the same time, she may never have tried food (although Outsiders can choose to eat), which would make this is a new experience to explore.
Since the character gained the pounce ability, it can take all of its attacks on a charge, including rake attacks.
1) Grab and trip are both abilities that are typically applied to individual attacks, so it would make sense that you could only apply each to either the bite or to the claws (you could apply both the grab and the trip to the same type of attack, though). However, this interaction isn't particularly clear; the archetype should probably have made some sort of mention towards this type of thing.
After reading the text more fully, I don't think you can call a bolt as a standard action on round 2 (which, in the example given, is the first round of the spell's duration). It says "each round after the first you may use a standard action to call a bolt".
Since round 2 is the first round of the spell's duration (the casting time isn't part of the duration), it's not "after the first" yet.
It's somewhat ambiguous though.