|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Mark Moreland wrote:
Thank you for the info. It seemed odd that we we were told we had to get there this way, but that we had to pay for it ourselves at a significant price.
Again, thanks for clearing that up and I'll keep that in mind if I get the chance to run this scenario.
At the Las Vegas NeonCon the beginning of November, I got a chance to play this mod.
At the very start, we're told by the GM that getting to the Chasm as fast as possible is a priority so we HAD to either spend 2PP each for teleport or pay cash for the spell. We put forth other options, such as one of our players had purchased the vanity award for a ship and would use that to get us there faster but we were again told that we had to teleport, and we had to foot the bill for it.
I had just come off of two GM credits so I had the cash to buy a scroll of teleport, and we were lucky enough to have a mage almost high enough to cast the spell. After his Caster Level check to use the scroll, we arrived and started.
But what about parties without someone who can teleport or means of rapid overland travel?
I realize that 1125 gold may not seem like much (unless everyone just finished upgrading like most of the party had), but to have to pay that or give up your total posilbe PP from the scenario just to play the scenario seems wrong. What happens if nobody has the cash to buy the scroll, pay the cost for spellcasting (450g per person) or can't/won't pay the PA? Do they have to leave the table now?
I haven't had the chance to read the scenario and see if maybe I missed something, but I'd like some input as to why the scenario is set up this way or what should have been done different?
Zephyre Al'dran wrote:
Just another quick clarification issue: Assume you have 2 archetype that replace or alter a class feature identically, ie if one gives you smite evil once perday, and the other give smite evil once perday, but none of the other class feature replacements are replacing a class feature of the same type or level is it still legal? I assume so, since it's identical feature without any difference, but they are 2 different archtypes.
If I'm reading this right, you're asking if an arhcetype replaces class ability "A" with Smite Evil 1/day, and another replaces class ability "B" with Smite Evil 1/day, do they stack? In this case, I think they do and they're not modifying the same ability. However, if they both replace the same ability at any point in their progression you can't take both.
After meeting a travelling circus stopped on the side of the road, we found out one of their performers was missing. We decided to go after her, as a safe place to sleep would be nice. (We had run into a wyvern earlier, which the 3 of us managed to bludgeon into submission.)
The magus/cleric, monk and Avik managed to follow the tracks to a swampy area and were attacked by the spider once we found the girl's body. The creature was hard to hit, but doing devastating damage whenever it hit us. During one point while it was phased out, the monk grabbed the girl's body and took off to go warn the circus. (This monk was a Tetori, and grappling something that phases out as a free action isn't very effective.) The magus managed a powerful hit, channeling a shocking grasp through his sword. He was charging up to use another one, but he could not take another hit from the creature. Avik taunted the creature, goading it into attacking him even though any blow landed would finish him off. If did indeed, a spectacular hit that saw the creature's mandibles sever Avik's head. This was followed by another spectacular hit, this time from the magus who skewered the beast on his scimitar.
Funeral services have yet to be held.
That was me. What I was trying to say is that taking levels of monk kinda invalidate the Feral Mutagen, as you're getting 2 d6 attacks. While you get more possible damage with the c/c/b (d4/d4/d8), it's harder to enhance them than a monk's attack and you have to keep your hands free. (Bless weapon and magic weapon work on a monk's hands, and you can hold stuff in both hands and still get full attacks.)
My opinion, anyways.
I missed that part of the rules as well. That info should be moved up with the FLurry of blows initial desciption to avoid confusion.
So I think we're on the same page now.
I don't think it's broken. You have to meet the prereqs for any feat you pick up with Combat Trick. (It doesn't say you don't have to meet the prereqs, at least.) That right there prevents you from taking many of the chain feats. No Power Attack? No Cleave, then.
Now, I could see this being exceedingly useful with two such characters. Each pends the Ki points to take a teamwork feat. Other than some situational benefits, I think the tricks would be better spent on combat tricks themselves.
My opinion, though, and certainly an interesting build.
Cool, but it says one type of natural weapon, and the damage isn't increased, so if I did this would there really be a reason to take the feral mutagen? It seems I could attack with claws and bite, or I can furry of blows with claws which would be worse while a low level than a normal full-round attack, and then at higher monk levels I'd just furry of blows and never use my bite.
Well, that depends. Claws deal slashing, while IUS is bludgeoning (unless you have a style or ability that changes that). Situationally, that could be useful, but you can easily get the same effect by using a monk slashing weapon. I'd have to agree with you that it's not the best way to use the Feral Mutagen, though.
A full Attack action is a type of full-round action. It's under the heading of "Full-Round Actions" on page 187 of the Core Rulebook. Additionally, on page 183, it lists "Full attack" under the "Full-Round Actions" on the AoO table.
So you couldn't use your natural attacks and squeeze in a flurry of blows for a couple extra attacks. You could use all the natural attacks provided by your BAB, or you could Flurry, getting all the Unarmed Strikes provided by your BAB+1 from the flurry.
It depends on hom much you want to dip. 2 levels of monk gets you Improved Unarmed Strike, imrpved unarmed damage and two free feats. If you use the "Master of Many Styles" archetype, you don't need the other prereqs for those style feats. And while the selection isn't as vast as a fighter's, it might net you better bonuses.
Also, looking it up, Feral Combat Training allows you to use your natural weapon with flurry of blows.
Flurry of Blows is a full-attack action, so you couldn't combine it with natural attacks.
The Core Rulebook - 4th Printing: wrote:
The feat name is right, I beleive. The archetype is "Master of Many Styles", but you only get to ignore the prereqs on the ones you pick as monk bonus feats. That being said, if you're gonna double-dip like that take Snake Style. It allows you to use a Sense Motive roll to replace your normal or touch AC vs. one attack (it's used as an immediate action). Coupled with the "Skilled (Sense Motive)" evolution, you can almost effectively negate one attack a round.
The feats, such as Stunning Fist and Elemental Fist, apply to Unarmed Attacks. These are their own attack type of attack, and as such can't normally be used with your claws. There is a feat, in Ultimate Combat I believe, that allows you to use unarmed strick feats with a specific natural weapon. It requires Weapon Focus with the natural weapon you want to use.
As for the styles, you can use those whenever you like. Abilities that buff Stunning Fist and the like only apply when you can use the Stunning Fist.
As for the spell, you can apply a held touch spell through a melee attack (not a weapon though). However, you have to cast the spell first, then use your normal melee attack second. This usually means you're using up two rounds to do it. The benefit is that if, for some reason you had a higher crit range or modifier on your unarmed/natural attack it would apply to the spell. Also, yes, you could do a full attack the round after you cast the spell and get the bonus on each attack assuming you have enough charges of the spell.
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
I don't see the claw attacks being useful in that build. They're only d4, and you can't use monk abilities on them without investing 2 feats (Weapon Focus-Claws is a prereq for the feat that lets you use monk special abilities with a natural attack). Unless I missed something somewhere, Unarmed Strike is a type of attacks, just like Claws. Claws are considered Natural Weapons, and suffer a -5 penalty to hit if you use a manufactured weapon to attack with as well.
It is true that this race lends itself to certain melee classes well. However, that mostly because, in my opinion, the other racial options are pretty much useless. And if you're going to take +1 damage, you migh as well play something that can get the benefit.
The third attack dropped her to -11, with an 11 Con (after the eidolon disappeared). The nearest cleric, not realizing how hurt she was, stepped over her body and dealt the final blow to The Splatterman, only to hear his companion breathe her last breath and expire beneath his feet.
Funeral rites were administered at the temple of Pharasma, and her body was shipped home to her family.
I too played a summoner, sythesist. I was all about the melee, and used the Eidolon to balance out my lackluster physical stats. 25-point buy, so no negatives.
Worked pretty well, but didn't come across as overpowered. In fact, I was the only party member to die in The Haunting of Harrowstone. My own fault, admittedly, but still the only death.
The +1 melee damage was helpful, as it turns out I was the only one capable of doing significant damage against some of the DR. (Eidolon had a 19 strength, giving me +5 to my melee damage.)
However, this was more because of being a synthesist than a changeling. Made a great backstory, and her eidolon looke like a hag (her mother's influence during her early years).
So, I don't think this race is overpowered compared to other races, but the biggest penalty (mom showing up) doesn't usually become a problem outside of non-AP game.
Still, a fun option.
First off, I agree comparing a 16th level ability to a base one is a little off target. However, forcing a character to take a specific path with their eidolon is also not the way to go (in my opinion, at least). It's like forcing a two-weapon fighter to choose only longswords and shortswords, clerics to only have healing and sun domains if they are good or allow a necromancy wizard to only have necromantic spells in their spellbook. Many role-playing concepts become invalidated by this requirement.
How would spellcasting the way you describe work with a small synthesist in a medium eidolon? They obviously have room to move their arms, so would they be able to cast spells in an armless eidolon? What about a medium caster in a large eidolon?
I'd say let the evolutions "Limbs" and "Tail" count for spellcasting purposes. If that seems overpowered (which I don't think it is), add a 1-point evolution that allows those extremeties to count as arms for spellcasting purposes. This addresses most of the rule problems, as these extremeties are still affected by being grappled, held, etc. Another option, as mentioned earlier in the thread, is change the way the Synthesist gets stats from his eidolon. Make it something like "A sythesist gains the following modifiers to their physical ability scores when fused with their eidolon, depending on the eidolon's base form:
By requiring arms, you are forcing players to either a)abandon their character concept and buy arms (unles their concept has arms, of course) or b)blow evo points/feat on it.
How about replacing the Summon Monster ability? Maybe swap out the Summon Monster SLA with the following:
"Summon Eidolon: Starting at 1st level, a synthesist's bond to his fused eidolon is so powerful that he can call it at a moment's notice. A summoner can summon and fuse with his eidolon (as if using the "Summon Eidolon" spell) as a spell-like ability. He can use this ability as a standard action. He can use this ability a number of times a day equal to 3+ his Charisma modifier. The eidolon remains for only 1 round per level (instead of 1 minute per level). At 3rd level, and every 2 levels thereafter, the summoner can use this ability 1 extra time per day.
Additionally, as long as a sythesist is fused with an eidolon with the "Limbs (Arms)", "Limbs (Legs)" or "Tail" evolution, he can cast spells requiring somatic compnents while fused. This in all ways like casting a spell while not fused, and is subject to all the same rules (casting while threatened, pinned, violent motion, etc.). These abilities replace a summoner's "Summon Monster" ability."
These are just my ideas, and I hope they find merit here. I have some other thoughts on base forms I'll be posting in the summoner thread, but I wanted to post these here.
Jason Nelson wrote:
Here's a question for you. (And I apologize if this was answered - I didn't see it in the posts).
If you apply a template for WS, say a Huge dire bear, do you use the updated die of damage that the template applies? I realize that you use only the stat modifiers given by WS, but this is outside of that. Would your reach increase, since it's not explicitly covered by WS?
I would say so, otherwise it's just a "flavor" thing that penalizes those animal archetypes that don't have Huge animals that fall into their specialized realm.
Of course, none of this matters for RAW until we have an errata for the archetypes.
I fully support the RAI you've discussed, though.
There was a thread on this with the archetype designer commenting on the Shaman archetypes. Here is the link.
Intent-wise, you can't Wild-Shape until 6th level, where it acts as Wild Shape III for your totem animal but Wild Shape I for anything else.
Additionally, you kinda-sorta can apply templates for shape-shifting. You can shape-sift to a huge bear, for instance. However, you only get the Wild Shape stat bonuses, NOT the bonuses for the template. The WS covers all the bonuses for turning into a creature of that specific size. It wasn't clear if you'd modify the damage dice based on the template or not. I'd say so, as a huge bear doing the same dice of damage as a large bear doesn't make sense. (Yes, you get some extra strength bonuses ut that still doens't make up for it.)
My thoughts, but please review the thread I mentioned above for further clarifications.
Hope that helps.
#Edited with link to post.
Yes, having a readied action doesn't prevent AoOs or the like. You're readied action above should also work, but if you fail to trip your opponent with the AoO then the readied action won't go off.
That's the only down-side I can see, and it's not really much of one.
You might also want to consider Stand Still. If you don't want to trip them, you can prevent them from moving at all. Do it after they've moved 10 feet and they only have a standard action left.
Sounds like a fun guy to have around!
OK, I apparently got the Str/Dex bonus and Natural Armor columns confused, so I now see why they can't. So that's settled.
I have some other questions, but I'll post them in the Synthesist thread.
Thanks again for the input.
DAVID MCMAHON wrote:
I think that would depend on what type of bonuses they are. WIthout my books in front of me, I'd assume the Pyromaniac gives a racial and Focused Domain is something else (sacred or profane, perhaps.) If that's teh case, then yeah, they should stack. The wouldn't if they were the same bonus type, however.
This would also mean you'd get an extra +1 on your fire bolt damage.
Again, this is without books in front of me.
Hope that helps.
I've read the FAQs, and while I know the armor a Sythesist wears is rendered "inert" while fused it doesn't say anything about putting armor on the Eidolon. I only bring this question up because a normal Eidolon can't wear armor because it interferes with the connection to the summoner. However, with a synthesist being inside the eidolon I don't see how it can interfere.
Now, I'm not trying to super-power this class. However, when I look at what you give up with a synthesist I don't feel like you get enough back.
What you give up:
What you get:
Maybe I'm missing some major bonus of the class that balances it all out. If so, please let me know what it is.
Otherwise, I feel that a synthesist's eidolon should be able to use armor, but with all the normal penalties. (Hit penalty for non-profiency, arcane spell failure, etc.)
As a side thought, since a synthesist's armor goes inert while fused, does he still take the penalties to climb, swim, etc? What about arcane spell failure?
Also, can a systhesist give his eidolon the Simple and Martial weapon use evolutions and use those weapons without penalty when fused?
Just my thoughts, and I'm looking forward to replies.
That was only the first strike, which brought him to just below half. The other attacks before his next turn finished him off. But you're right, I shouldn't just think about it being anti-climactic just because the first shot was a crit and not the last one.
To Jagyr - no, he was 5 feet from being in range of his original target, unfortunately. That was a little snagging point as well - it was the movement getting into range that provoked the AoO. Again, so as to not bog down our time slot I just ruled he was stopped before getting into range.
I agree with what's been posted here, that if he was interrupted prior to his base movement he would still have a standard action left (most likely being used to hit whoever stopped him).
Thanks again for the input!
Hi, all. I ran a game this weekend and the monk in the party threw a brain-twister my way. When an ogre went to charge PC "A" he ran right past PC "B", who got an AoO. PC "B" was a monk, and used his Stunning Fist on the AoO to apply the fatigued condition to the ogre. Now, while fatigued you can't run or charge. This brought up several questions:
It was ruled at the table that it did indeed end his charge, and he did not take an attack on anyone even though there were 3 other targets in range. I didn't give him the penalty to his AC, however. (Not that it mattered). It did make this particular Ogre a little anti-climactic, as he was destroyed before his next round of attacks could come around. (39-point crit was the deciding factor in this). However, looking at it with some time to reflect he should still have been able to attack someone in range, just as you can switch targets with multiple attacks.
I'd appeciate anyone's input on this. Thanks in advance.
If by "Dedicated Healer" they just mean someone with a ton of healing spells, keep the druid and get some wands. My druid in PFS does that - keeps a wand and doesn't bother to memorize a spell. Alternatively, get a couple pearls of power, 1st-3rd level. That way, you can memorize 1 cure spell and cast it one additional time per appropriate pearl. However, I know that sometimes you have to sacrifice a bit of your fun so everyone can enjoy themselves.
A couple of suggestions, though:
I know this comes off a little harsh, but you should not have to give up all your fun because you're the only one willing to compromise for your party.
Now, I do realize I may have mis-interpreted your group's attitude but it sounds to me like a case of everyone wanting to be up rolling the damage diceand nobody wanting to take a "boring" role like healer.
I hope this helps, and I deeply apologize if this comes off like me being a ****.
Goth Guru wrote:
Goth Guru, class skills don't work that way in PFS. Class skills get a +3 bonus to them as long as you have put at least 1 rank in them. (You also don't get the x4 at first level.)
This is one of the things that make it so possibly overpowering. Since you can't make knowledge skills untrained, you can put 1 into every skill and then hope for 20, or put the skills into diplomacy while you're in town. When you head for a dungeon, take it off, wait a day, put it back on and suddenly have ranks in disable device.
Just my thoughts on this:
I don't believe that skill points were listed on the Ioun stones because it's assumed that people are taking it off to sleep, thereby preventing it from ever getting to the point where it would matter. If you are going to keep it on, I'd rule that you'd treat it like a headband in this thread. It specifically states that the decision to handle the headband this way was to prevent skill point abuse and massive tracking.
I'd definately mark this question to be FAQ'd so that we can get an official response.
First off, the link to pinned above is obsolete. It was from 2009, and has been incorporated into the errata and new books. Therefore, toss it out the window.
Second, if helpless and pinend are the same thing, why are there two different entries on table 8-6? I don't see individual entries for bound, sleeping, paralyzed or unconcious, which are specifically listed as examples of helpless. Since they are listed as separate entries, don't try and merge them. Go with how it's writtten - pinned in not helpless, they just lose their dex bonus to AC and take an additionall -4 penalty as well as have a limited set of actions to choose from.
If you want to make a pinned opponent helpless, bind him up on your next action. THEN he's helpless and you can do what you will.
Just my thoughts on the matter.
Doug Doug wrote:
Well, crap. Now I feel like an idiot... :) Thanks for the reply, though.
Thank you both for your feedback. I agree that it's a sucky position to be in.
Doug Doug, thanks for the idea. I'll keep that in mind if I ever find myself in such an unpleasant situation again.
I'd like to add a more-or-less on-topic question: Can someone with IUS use it for AoOs when wielding a reach weapon? For instance, can a figher with a longspear threaten this immediate area?
For that matter, assuming their BAB allows for multiple attacks can they split them between the longspear and unarmed strikes?
I ran this adventure over the weekend and had a question about GM credit - is the "Exemplar of Falcon's Hollow" reward something a GM gets? I only ask because I'm not sure if it falls under the "regional
I'm guessing it does fall under this category and am not taking it regardless, but I'd like to know whether is does count?
Thanks in advance.
I ran "Black Waters" over this weekend and ended up in a bit of a dilema, one that cost a PC his life.
In the last fight with the ghast, the party went right for his alcove without knowing he was there. Two of the characters got paralyzed in the alcove, and the rest retreated (without their paralyzed party members) back into the room with the circle of students. A ghast has an Int of 17 and a Wis of 18, so wouldn't just blindly charge out and leave his two meals alone to un-paralyze and hit him from behind. I gave a 30/30/40 chance that he'd try and kill (coup de grace) one of the PCs (30% for each) or would actually charge out and try to get the others. I rolled really low, so one of the PCs died. After this, of course, the other PCs came running back to try and protect their other party member.
How should I have handled this? Should I have had the ghoul just make normal full round attacks on each paralyzed individual (which would have probably killed them anyways)?
I know that the PCs didn't run away because they were hoping the ghould followed them and leave their friends alone.
I guess this boils down to a more fundamental question - how to play intelligent evil? I feel that the game is more fun when there is actually a chance that your character can die. Intelligent creatures are where I feel this danger lies. While it's easy to have a mindless creature switch from the incapacitated character to whoever struck it last, I feel the smarter ones will be more methodical in how they deal with the heroes.
I don't like killing PCs. However, other than blantanly going "Well, everyone else ran away and left you to die but instead I'm going to run out and chase the rest of the party" I didn't see away around this. While I don't think that the players (especially the one who died) would have objected, it seems like it turns the game into a "show up and win" scenario with no challenge.
I'd like to know if there's any official stance on something like this, as well as other GM's thoughts.
I ran this at a PFS home game this weekend. It went pretty well, but after reading some of the info on here I now have a couple of questions:
1) In Act 3, when helping Laurel is says that "Once Laurel succeeds in curing the PCs (and Inor) of the disease, she now has the recipe to for an antiplague concoction..." As this reads, she doesn't have the anti-plague until she cures at least 1 PC. I take this to mean that one PC makes the pair of successive fort saves. Am I mis-reading that? This proved almost impossible for my party of 5, and in fact the only reason I didn't lose any PCs was that one had a couple of scrolls of Lesser Restoration.
2) In act 3 as well, Laurel is using her heal skill to help the PCs. This means they get a bonus on their next save, which is the next day. As noted in a previous post, their fort saves go down with each failed save. Does Laurel give them early saves or the like?
A few notes about what happened
I had a ton of fun running this, and the reasons some of the PCs had when helping Laurel were pretty good.
One last note, this adventure poses a very real and large risk of death. Three failed fort saves could leave a low Cha character out of the adventure, or a low Con character dead.
I know this will sound silly, but can a druid change his nature bond once selected? I would guess not via RAI, but there's nothing in RAW to prevent this. Here's why I say that:
For the Paladin's "Divine Bond" on p. 63, the Ranger's "Hunter's Bond" on p. 66 and the Wizard's "Arcane Bond" on p. 78, they all say that they can't be changed once selected. However, there's nothing in the Druid's "Nature Bond" saying that it can't be changed.
As I GM PFS games, I'd like to get the official ruling on this. I'd also welcome any other advice on it. As I said, I'm pretty sure they can't change it via RAI, but what concerns me is the RAW interpretation.
Thanks in advance for the input.
I did a lot of looking into this for a concept I was working on. Here's what I came up with.
1) Shield spikes are listed in the CR as armor, not weapons. All they do is change the damage type of the shield from bludgeoning to piercing.
I personally lean with method A, as method B opens the door to people trying to enchant boots and gloves as weapons as well as items of Str/Dex/Etc. (+2 Holy Dancing boots of elvenkind seem kinda wierd).
The reason I used boots and gloves is that someone might try to enchant them as weapons to help with unarmed attacks. I know the example above is rather silly, but I can see where it might be tried.
Instead of swapping out that one point into Perception, why not add reach to one of his attacks? Seems like it might be a point better spent and more in-line with where he's going - different parts of his body keep growing as he progresses in size. Just a though.
Check the APG. One of the alternate favored class bonuses (for gnomes, I believe), is that they can add 1/4 to their evolution pool every level so that at level 9 the Eidolon would have 15.25 instead of 13. (I read that as .25 points, not 1/4 of their total pool.) THis can be especially handy if you want to use some of the evolution points for yourself (which is one of the evolutions).
Count me in the camp of 'make it a dern class feature if you're going to require fighter levels'. The only things that should be used for feat prerequisites are BAB, skill ranks, and caster level. Thus, characters cannot get a feat before the point you think it is appropriate, and they don't have to plan out their character in advance when they want a certain feat, and they don't get screwed when they decide they want a feat but need three other feats to get the one they want.
I think the fighter level requirements are there to keep every fighter from getting free weapon focus/specialization. With the sheer number of options a fighter has, they may not want to spend that feat on the extra damage and instead get a combat manuever or defensive feats. They also may not want to focus on a single weapon, so spend their feat elsewhere.
As for only requiring BAB, skill ranks or caster levels for feat, I stongly disagree. You should spend some time planning out a character. I can't see any reason why an 11th level fighter with a 10 Dex who's always wielded a two-handed weapon should be able to pick up Greater Two-Weapon Fighting for two additional off-hand attacks or why a wizard should be able to pick up Heavy Armor Proficiency without taking anything else. However, I do think there should be feats that allow a character to use one stat in place of another for feat prerequisites. (Say, something that may allow a fighter to use Wis instead of Int to qualify for Combat Expertise.)
Just my thoughts on the matter.
Well, it may not be much but here's my take on it:
1) Since the spell does NOT have a "Target" or "Area" entry, you can't attack the round you cast it. (The spell's primary intention appears to be illumination, not damage.)
I hope this helps.
Carbon D. Metric wrote:
Actually, there's a few things that seem wrong there.
1) Shield spikes are not weapons. They increase the damage type to piercing and damage die, but they are not waepons themselves. They're even listed under armor and not weapons.
Carbon D. Metric wrote:
3) A +3 Bashing Heavy Shield would only get +3. In the latest printing (and I assume the errata), Shield Master lets you "add your shield's enhancement bonus to attacks and damage rolls made with the shield as if it was a weapon enhancement bonus".a) Additionally, while you get to add your shield's enhancement bonus to attacks and damage rolls, it doesn't say it makes the shield count as a magic weapon. This begs the question of whether it would bypass DR. I know this can be read either way, so I thought it worth asking.
Carbon D. Metric wrote:
By the new rules, all of those would be at 2 less.
Hmm. I'm with Mynameisjake on this one. Given than it specifically mentions that the rope can't be removed or hidden, but that it can be pulled free with an insane amount of weight (around a 35 STR score). I'm thinking that the spell should also have a focus, that being the rope. If the rope is removed from the spell, the spell ends. However, I'd counter it by giving the rope something like a hardness of 25. Prevent most things that don't have an insane strength from cutting it, either.
A little more reading has my brain going. Please give me some feedback.
1) The spell specifically states that "the upper end is, in fact, fastened to an extradimensional space..." - This to me sounds like the rope ends at the outside of the rope trick, and does not go inside it (much like a rope ladder ends at a trap door, rather than continuing up another 5'). Also, if the rope went inside then a 5' rope wouldn't be outside the rope trick.
I'm leaning towards intepreting the size of the space as exactly what's needed to hold the number of people inside it. If there's one medium-sized creature in it, there's a 5'x5' area in addition to the entrance. If there are 2 large and 3 medium, then it would have 11 squares - 2 sets of 10'x10' and 3 at 5'x5'. Again, these are all in addition to the entrance.
Again, any ideas on this would be great. Thanks.
Tom Baumbach wrote:
I feel silly. I hadn't thought about acrobatics. I was busy trying to figure out how to bull rush up a rope... However, I'm thinking there should be a Fort save (DC 15) to keep from being nauseated at the change of gravity if the orientation is other than up through the middle.
Tom Baumbach wrote:
The Core Rulebook says only that "A summoned monster cannot summon or otherwise conjure another creature, nor can it use any teleportation or planar travel abilities." Leaving a rope trick isn't a planar travel ability. However, any creature leaving the rope trick would be subject to the fort save I mentioned above. Additionally, an acrobatics check when leaving to land on their feet if they can't climb out.
Thanks for the input! It's got me thinking on ways to make it useful, but not overpowering. Any input on these ideas would be vreat, too!
I ran a game a couple weeks ago and had one of the PCs use Rope Trick in an intersting fashion. I went ahead and ruled for him to do it this time, I'd like to get some clarifications so that it doesn't become a habit (because it can be extremely overpowering).
1) As an extra-dimensional space, can it be shaped however the caster likes? For instance, does the rope have to come in through the bottom or can they have it come through the side? (If it's coming in through the side, the people inside can block unauthorized entry by standing in the entry square.)
2) Summoning spells - can they be cast inside the the monsters sent out? This is my major concern, as you can hide inside it and send monster after monster out after the enemies. I know that ROpe Trick says spells can't e cast into or out of the rope trick, but the Summon spell isn't cast outside or through.
3) If the rope is destroyed, does the spell end or are the occupants trapped inside until the spell ends?
Any help that can be provided would be awesome. I thought I recalled something about the caster having to remain on the same plane as his summoned creatures, but try as I might I couldn't find anything to back it up.