| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Reading the rules on Ability Score Damage, Penalty, and Drain and looking at some of the spells have got me confused.
Edit:
Damage: This damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability. For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability. If the amount of ability damage you have taken equals or exceeds your ability score, you immediately fall unconscious until the damage is less than your ability score. The only exception to this is your Constitution score. If the damage to your Constitution is equal to or greater than your Constitution score, you die.
Ability damage can be healed through the use of spells, such as lesser restoration.
Penalty: While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Then the text goes on listing how damage (and Penalty) affects each Ability.
- Charisma: Damage to your Charisma score causes you to take penalties on Charisma-based skill checks. This penalty also applies to any spell DCs based off Charisma and the DC to resist your channeled energy.
Reading these examples and the text on Ability Score Damage/Penalty there is nothing to indicate that the ability to cast spell is affected by ability Score Damage or Penalty, on the contrary. The text clearly says “damage does not actually reduce an ability” . As for Ability Score Penalty: “penalties function just like ability damage”, but they are less serious since ability score penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1. Further more there is nothing in the text indicating that Damage or Penalty would affect the ability to use feats like Selective Channeling if the requisite ability score drops below the minimum required to use the feat.
Yet the spell Touch of Idiocy states:
With a touch, you reduce the target’s mental faculties. Your successful melee touch attack applies a 1d6 penalty to the target’s Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. This penalty can’t reduce any of these scores below 1. This spell’s effect may make it impossible for the target to cast some or all of its spells, if the requisite ability score drops below the minimum required to cast spells of that level.
This contradicts the rules on Damage/Penalty. They don't actually reduce an ability. But the spell indicates that they do. If they do how about a cleric with Selective Channeling? If her Charisma score drops below 13 can she still use the feat? Would a fighter still be able to use feats like Improved Disarm and Combat Expertise if his int. droped below 13? And does Touch of Idiocy stack with it self?
What about power attack and Ray of Enfeeblement?
RoE: The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5). The subject’s Strength score cannot drop below 1. A successful Fortitude save reduces this penalty by half. This penalty does not stack with itself. Apply the highest penalty instead.
Here the spell clearly states the penalty does not stack with itself, but if the requisite ability score drops below the minimum required to to feats like power attack, can you still use the feat? Let's look at the wording on strength damage:
- Damage to your Strength score causes you to take penalties on strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls, and weapon damage rolls (if they rely on Strength). The penalty also applies to your Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Small or larger) and your Combat Maneuver Defense.
No words on the damage affecting access to feats and no words on the Carrying Capacity. As for Carrying Capacity we have this little confusing line in the text on ability score damage: “For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.” Does this indicate that Carrying Capacity is affected?
Now, one could argue that Damage or Penalty to your Strength score should not affect access to feats even if the requisite ability score drops below the minimum required to use th feat and the Carrying Capacity should not be affected since the text on Damage to your Strength doesn't mention this. On the other hand there is nothing in the text on Damage to your Charisma that indicates that your spell casting ability is affected, yet Touch of Idiocy says it does.
Finally there is Drain. Ability Drain: Ability drain actually reduces the relevant ability score. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to lose skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. Ability drain can be healed through the use of spells such as restoration.
The wording on drain is pretty solid.
The three: Damage, Penalty, and Drain, but some spells doesn't seam to fit into these three categories.
Feeblemind
Target creature’s Intelligence and Charisma scores each drop to 1. The affected creature is unable to use Intelligence- or Charisma based skills, cast spells, understand language, or communicate coherently. Still, it knows who its friends are and can follow them and even protect them. The subject remains in this state until a heal, limited wish, miracle, or wish spell is used to cancel the effect of the feeblemind.
Is this drain? If so why can't it be healed through the use of restoration? Or is it ability score damage or ability score penalty?
The same question goes to Blasphemy and Bestow Curse.
Bestow Curse (Will negates)
–6 decrease to an ability score (minimum 1).
This can't hardly be a ability score damage or ability score penalty. It a 4:th level spell if you're a wizard and Ray of Enfeeblement is a 1:st level spell.
If it's not ability score damage or ability score penalty, what is it? Drain a curse? Does the decrease affect the use of feats like power attack, dodge, Mobility, spring attack, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat chain, Selective Channeling, etc. if if the requisite ability score drops below the minimum required to use the feat? Would it affect spell casting? Touch of Idiocy sure does and its a 2:nd level spell with no save.
I have the same problem with Blasphemy, “The creature’s Strength score decreases by 2d6 points for 2d4 rounds. Save for half “.
Is the strength score decrease “ability score damage” or “ability score penalty” or “drain” or a “curse” or what? How does the decrease affect the strength score? Does it actually reduce the the ability score? If not would it affect the use of feats like Power attack ?
There are ability score Damage, Penalty, and Drain, but there is evidently more type of afflictions, an unnamed decrease to an ability score. Also there is some confusion and inconsistencies in the rules that needs to be address
Thoughts?
|
I think you're misunderstanding the phrase "does not actually reduce an ability". I'm pretty sure it's only referring to the fact that you don't have to erase your original ability score and replace it with the lowered score. It's meant to emphasize that it's not a permanent thing.
AFAIK, you're treated in every way as if your ability score were the new lowered value.
I believe that any spell that doesn't state in the description that it's ability damage, is giving an ability penalty.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gjorbjond, I don't think that's correct. My understanding from reading other threads on this issue is that this is an intentional departure from 3.5 -- ability damage DOES NOT lower the ability score. It doesn't kill feats or otherwise screw with what your character can and can't do; it only provides a set penalty to certain identified checks and stats.
Everything seems consistent with that except the "touch of idiocy" spell description, so I'm inclined to conclude that the spell description is an outdated holdover and the last paragraph should be removed. Int-lowered wizards can still cast all their spells, just at a reduced DC (as spell DC is one of the lowered stats for ability damage or penalty).
Then again, a fireball cast by a wizard with ability damage of one less than his Int has a Reflex DC of 8...
I think you're misunderstanding the phrase "does not actually reduce an ability".
I'm pretty sure I am not.
I'm pretty sure it's only referring to the fact that you don't have to erase your original ability score and replace it with the lowered score. It's meant to emphasize that it's not a permanent thing. AFAIK, you're treated in every way as if your ability score were the new lowered value.
Edit: No you're not treated in every way as if your ability score were the new lowered value. They have listed what damage actually change.
I believe that any spell that doesn't state in the description that it's ability damage, is giving an ability penalty.
Where does the rules say so?
I actually think you are wrong on all accounts, but thanks for the feedback. :-)
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Gjorbjond, I don't think that's correct. My understanding from reading other threads on this issue is that this is an intentional departure from 3.5 -- ability damage DOES NOT lower the ability score. It doesn't kill feats or otherwise screw with what your character can and can't do; it only provides a set penalty to certain identified checks and stats.
Everything seems consistent with that except the "touch of idiocy" spell description, so I'm inclined to conclude that the spell description is an outdated holdover and the last paragraph should be removed. Int-lowered wizards can still cast all their spells, just at a reduced DC (as spell DC is one of the lowered stats for ability damage or penalty).
Then again, a fireball cast by a wizard with ability damage of one less than his Int has a Reflex DC of 8...
You're probably right in your assessment, but your interpretation of Touch of Idiocy pretty much destroys this spell. There are far better 2nd level spells than this crippled interpretaion of this spell - wasting a slot for a chance to reduce an enemy caster's save DC by (on average) 2 is just, well, a wasted spell slot.
On the other hand, converting this spell to ability drain is way above the scope of a second level spell.
The alternative middle ground is to modify the final paragraph to say something like:
This mental impairment caused by this spell is so pervasive that it may make it impossible for the target to cast some or all of its spells. For the sake of determining whether a spellcaster can use his spells, calculate his requisite ability score as if it had been reduced by the amount of damge inflicted by this spell. Do not actually reduce the ability score; for this purpose just calculate it as if it had been reduced. If the requisite ability score adjusted for this purpose drops below the minimum required to cast spells of that level, then the target cannot cast spells of that level until this ability damage is healed.
Doing that seems to fit in with the original intent of the spell, and lets the spell remain useful enough that some people might actually prepare it.
My understanding of the spells in question would be that they are departures from the normal rules. Basically exceptions to the way things normally work. That's why they explain in detail exactly what the spells in question do -- because they don't follow normal rules.
It's a case of specific over general rules. Something that they should have specifically explained at some point in the book (that is one thing I like about 4e -- it specifically states how to handle rule conflicts from abilities, that the specific parts of something overrules the general rules that would normally be followed).
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
My understanding of the spells in question would be that they are departures from the normal rules. Basically exceptions to the way things normally work.
What the point in rules if the are uncleare and full of exceptions?
Perhaps you are right or perhaps AvalonXQ is right.Why call it a penalty? It would be better saying it gives a 1d6 decrease to an ability score.
...and all my other questions remain.
How does Blasphemy, Bestow Curse, Feeblemind work? Do they actually reduce an ability?
Wow. Those rules are a lot more messed up than I initially thought!
Interesting...
Does that mean that they are effectively "Temporary" penalties and that penalties that last more than 24 hours should use the same rules as the "Permanent" bonuses?
I will post an answer to you later. I must make supper. Hope that's OK :-)
rules for rpgs were never meant to be an end all be all of what is possible, and how things in the shared experience works.
to all things there are exceptions. i would not be to too concerned about what the written rules state. as long as there is an agreement around your particular table on how something should work. and if they cant come to an agreement, then you disregard the actions.
it may be much easier to say that this spell reduces this. and be done with it.
every rule ever written is meant to be disregarded.
i would not worry about it. i never liked ability damage anyway, it was way to much work. im glad that it doesnt exist im my rules anymore.
My understanding of the spells in question would be that they are departures from the normal rules. Basically exceptions to the way things normally work.What the point in rules if the are uncleare and full of exceptions?
Perhaps you are right or perhaps AvalonXQ is right.
Why call it a penalty? It would be better saying it gives a 1d6 decrease to an ability score.
...and all my other questions remain.
How does Blasphemy, Bestow Curse, Feeblemind work? Do they actually reduce an ability?
Because in all situations except for these specific cases they work exactly like the normal rules work. These spells work in all ways like the normal penalties do -- however with additional effects specific to the spells in question. They also have some abnormal curing conditions in some cases, which is why they are worded the way they are.
Otherwise it would simply say, "'x' ability penalty" and not go into specific detail.
It's an exception to the normal rules... hence why it is magic and has more of an explanation.
|
|
I actually think you are wrong on all accounts, but thanks for the feedback. :-)
Yeah, it's one of the things I keep having trouble with. By default I keep falling back to the 3.5 rules I know so well and it makes it especially difficult when there are rule changes are in the form of omissions. I tend to automatically fill in the things that weren't mentioned.
Because in all situations except for these specific cases they work exactly like the normal rules work. These spells work in all ways like the normal penalties do -- however with additional effects specific to the spells in question. They also have some abnormal curing conditions in some cases, which is why they are worded the way they are.
Otherwise it would simply say, "'x' ability penalty" and not go into specific detail.
It's an exception to the normal rules... hence why it is magic and has more of an explanation.
I think your wrong. I'm inclined to agree with AvalonXQ.
"The spell description is an outdated holdover and the last paragraph should be removed. Int-lowered wizards can still cast all their spells, just at a reduced DC (as spell DC is one of the lowered stats for ability damage or penalty)."If the the spell actually reduce an abilies how would that affect access to feats and channeling, etc?
It would make much more sense to say it gives a 1d6 decrease to an ability score for a duration of 10 min. /level and that it can be cured by the use of lesser resturation.
If you create an exception to a new rule you just creates confusion.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
My understanding of the spells in question would be that they are departures from the normal rules. Basically exceptions to the way things normally work. That's why they explain in detail exactly what the spells in question do -- because they don't follow normal rules.
The problem is that the "touch of idiocy" description isn't phrased as a modification, but rather as a reminder -- which makes sense, because it's word-for-word the same description in the 3.5 version of the spell, where that particular paragraph WAS simply a reminder of the way the rules actually worked.
This really does look to me like missed holdover text. Whether we disregard it (which nerfs the spell) or add the modification mentioned above (which I really like), I think is up to the GM.As for the others: ability penalties all around, period. Curse is high-level not because of the nature of the effect (one possibility is half a Stun, after all) but rather the duration: permanent! A permanent -6 ability penalty isn't too underpowered for a 4th-level spell.
Right Gjorbjond. I will try to explain how I see it. In order to avoid confusion let's rename these afflictions. The reason for renaming them is because I want to be able to use the words "damage" and "penalty" with out refering to a specific game term.
NIAS1 and NIAS2 are the same but differ in two regards.
NIAS1 works this way. The damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability. For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability. If the amount of ability damage you have taken equals or exceeds your ability score, you immediately fall unconscious until the damage is less than your ability score. The only exception to this is your Constitution score. If the damage to your Constitution is equal to or greater than your Constitution score, you die. Unless otherwise noted, damage to your ability scores is healed at the rate of 1 per day to each ability score that has been damaged. Ability damage can be healed through the use of spells, such as lesser restoration.
Then the rules lists in detail how the actual damage affects you.
Lets look at Intelligence:
- Intelligence: Damage to your Intelligence score causes you to take penalties on Intelligence-based skill checks. This penalty also applies to any spell DCs based on Intelligence.
As you notice the rules does not state that it affects access to feats or the ability to cast spells. Nor does it reduce the number of skills you have or the number of languages you know.
NIAS2 is just a lighter version of NIAS1. NIAS2 “cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time.” Thus we can conclude that NIAS1 can actually cause you to take an ability penalty that is permanent, but the damage to your ability scores is healed at the rate of 1 per day to each ability score that has been damaged.
The only difference between NIAS1 and NIAS2 is that the damage from NIAS2 cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
So the details on how Damage to your Intelligence Score is the same for both NIAS1och NIAS2.
NIAS3 on the other hand is quite different to the other two. This damage actually reduces the relevant ability score. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to lose skill points, hit points, and other bonuses. It can't be healed through the use of lesser restoration. You need spells such as restoration.
NIAS4 is more nasty than NIAS3.
Blasphemy, “The creature’s Strength score decreases by 2d6 points for 2d4 rounds. Save for half.”
There is no wording in the text that the condition can be Neutralized.
Feeblemind: The Duration is instantaneous (permanent). And only heal, limited wish, miracle, or wish spell can cancel the effect of Feeblemind. So unlike NIAS3 restoration won't work.
Bestow Curse. Duration permanent. The curse cannot be dispelled, but it can be removed with a break enchantment, limited wish, miracle, remove curse, or wish spell. So unlike NIAS3 restoration won't work.
The problem with NIAS is that there is no information if it actually reduces the relevant ability score. My guess, it probably does.
[...]
Then again, a fireball cast by a wizard with ability damage of one less than his Int has a Reflex DC of 8...
I you roll 6 on the d6 a level 5 wizard will probaly have at least 16 int. So the DC would still be 13 (int 10 + fireball is a level 3 spell).
My understanding of the spells in question would be that they are departures from the normal rules. Basically exceptions to the way things normally work. That's why they explain in detail exactly what the spells in question do -- because they don't follow normal rules.The problem is that the "touch of idiocy" description isn't phrased as a modification, but rather as a reminder -- which makes sense, because it's word-for-word the same description in the 3.5 version of the spell, where that particular paragraph WAS simply a reminder of the way the rules actually worked.
This really does look to me like missed holdover text.
Agree
Whether we disregard it (which nerfs the spell) or add the modification mentioned above (which I really like), I think is up to the GM.
Still it would be nice to get an answer from James or Jason.
Even if we disregard the last phrased in "touch of idiocy" it's still a nice spell. DC are affected, so are skills and will saves. And there is no save. A rogue or bard with use magic device and a wand can really give a spell caster or a tank a bad day. Just the fact that you can mess up someones will saves is nice.
As for the others: ability penalties all around, period. Curse is high-level not because of the nature of the effect (one possibility is half a Stun, after all) but rather the duration: permanent! A permanent -6 ability penalty isn't too underpowered for a 4th-level spell.
"ability penalties all around, period"? I'm not convinced you are right. I don't think they are ability penalties, but something else. What the are I don't know. You just need to read the text to Feeblemind:
"the affected creature is unable to use Intelligence- or Charisma based skills, cast spells, understand language, or communicate coherently."This doesn't sound like ability penalties.
I would like to know what they are and if they actually reduce the ability. A -6 dex reduction to a two weapon fighting rogue or fighter would be really mean.
I you roll 6 on the d6 a level 5 wizard will probaly have at least 16 int. So the DC would still be 13 (int 10 + fireball is a level 3 spell).
What I meant was.
A level 5 wizard will have at least a 16 Intelligence score. If you roll 6 the wizard would get a -3 penalty to the DC and if the DC is 16 the new DC would be 13.
An Errata would be nice or an answer or both.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
An Errata would be nice or an answer or both.
As I've mentioned on other threads... we ARE working on erratas and an FAQ. We're also in the home stretch for the next month of getting a LOT of huge products out in time for Gen Con, including the Advanced Player's Guide, three volumes of Pathfinder, the first of our novels, and several other products. While we're working on these greater concerns, we simply don't have the time to build FAQs and issue errata.
Once all that is done, I'm really hopeful we'll be able to get some work done on getting the FAQ up and running; the next round of errata may well be out before then, but if it's not, it'll hopefully not be far behind.
ANYway... as for these issues—ability drain and damage, however you work the rules, should basically just reduce the bonuses granted by the abilities by 1 for every two points of ability score reduced. Personally, I feel that the rules for ability damage and drain are overly complex for something that shouldn't be—when an ability score is damaged or drained, adjust the score as appropriate for the damage caused and then run with the new bonus you get from the reduced score. The difference between the two basically comes down to the fact that ability damage heals over time but ability drain does not; you need magic to restore points lost to ability drain.
Now, that all said, most lower level spells that manipulate ability scores don't actually do drain or damage at all. Ray of enfeeblement and touch of idiocy, for example, simply impart a penalty to the score. In both cases, this penalty is very short lived; 1 round/level for ray of enfeeblement and 10 min./level for touch of idiocy. Penalties to an ability score are NOT damage or drain; they are merely penalties. Since they're penalties, we can have them fade after a short time; if they were actual drain or damage they'd have to follow the rules for drain or damage.
But yeah... none of this is actually errata. The rules work as written, and adding lots of clarification text only bloats the text. The best place for clarification text is on these boards or, eventually (and again, hopefully soon!) in a rules FAQ.
As I've mentioned on other threads... we ARE working on erratas and an FAQ. We're also in the home stretch for the next month of getting a LOT of huge products out in time for Gen Con, including the Advanced Player's Guide, three volumes of Pathfinder, the first of our novels, and several other products. While we're working on these greater concerns, we simply don't have the time to build FAQs and issue errata.Once all that is done, I'm really hopeful we'll be able to get some work done on getting the FAQ up and running; the next round of errata may well be out before then, but if it's not, it'll hopefully not be far behind.
First of. Thanks for the answer.
I understand you don't have the time to build FAQs and issue errata right now. So I'll try to be patient. :-)
ANYway... as for these issues—ability drain and damage, however you work the rules, should basically just reduce the bonuses granted by the abilities by 1 for every two points of ability score reduced. Personally, I feel that the rules for ability damage and drain are overly complex for something that shouldn't be—when an ability score is damaged or drained, adjust the score as appropriate for the damage caused and then run with the new bonus you get from the reduced score. The difference between the two basically comes down to the fact that ability damage heals over time but ability drain does not; you need magic to restore points lost to ability drain.
Now, that all said, most lower level spells that manipulate ability scores don't actually do drain or damage at all. Ray of enfeeblement and touch of idiocy, for example, simply impart a penalty to the score. In both cases, this penalty is very short lived; 1 round/level for ray of enfeeblement and 10 min./level for touch of idiocy. Penalties to an ability score are NOT damage or drain; they are merely penalties. Since they're penalties, we can have them fade after a short time; if they were actual drain or damage they'd have to follow the rules for drain or damage.
imho your answer don't match the rules.
The rules says penalties and damage don't actually reduce an ability so Ray of enfeeblement should affect access to feats like power attack even if a fighter with str 16 gets hit ny a -6 penalty. Nor should touch of idiocy affect the ability to cast spells.But drain should.
Ray of enfeeblement should affect:
touch of idiocy should affect:
imho
Reading these examples and the text on Ability Score Damage/Penalty there is nothing to indicate that the ability to cast spell is affected by ability Score Damage or Penalty, on the contrary.
I guess it depends on whether you think "highest level spell possible to cast" is a "statistic listed with the relevant ability" or not.
Reading these examples and the text on Ability Score Damage/Penalty there is nothing to indicate that the ability to cast spell is affected by ability Score Damage or Penalty, on the contrary.I guess it depends on whether you think "highest level spell possible to cast" is a "statistic listed with the relevant ability" or not.
Well then the rules go on listing all the skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability. Right there on page 555 ;-)
Neither the ability to cast spell nor the ability to use feats are listed.|
Creative Director
|
imho your answer don't match the rules.
The rules says penalties and damage don't actually reduce an ability so Ray of enfeeblement should affect access to feats like power attack even if a fighter with str 16 gets hit ny a -6 penalty. Nor should touch of idiocy affect the ability to cast spells.
But drain should.
Ray of enfeeblement should affect:
Strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls, and weapon damage rolls (if they rely on Strength), Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Small or larger) and your Combat Maneuver Defense.
touch of idiocy should affect:
Intelligence-based skill checks. Any spell DCs based on Intelligence.
Wisdom-based skill checks and Will saving throws. Any spell DCs based on Wisdom.
Charisma-based skill checks. Any spell DCs based off Charisma and the DC to resist your channeled energy.
So if you have it all figured out, why the need for clarification?
snark stuff
I wasn't trying to come of as rude.
In your first post you explained you had a lot to do and explained to me why. Fine. I get that and I backed down. I could made some snark remark that the book came out last summer and soon it summer again. I didn't.Then you basically went on dismissing all I said. I didn't pick up on that and made rude remarks.
What's confusing me isn't rules on Ability Score Damage, Penalty, and Drain.
What's confusing is Touch of Idiocy.
Perhaps you are getting tired of my posts. Fine. Why don't you say so insead of just slipping a nonchalant answer....that I imho think is wrong.
If my tone is wrong I apologies, well english isn't my language. I started of thanking you. And to show you I might be wrong I added imho.
You changed your mind on vital strike + spring attack and You changed your mind on how level drain work. You are only human. So am I.
/ Kind regards Zark,
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay... now that we've narrowed it down to JUST touch of idiocy (giant posts that clutter the central concern do not help me answer questions, by the way—much better to get to the point and not try to post overly-detailed examinations of rules in the same post in which you're asking for clarification on how a single spell works), let me take a shot at addressing that particular spell.
Touch of idiocy applies a penalty to the target's mental scores (Int, Wis, and Cha). That's not damage, nor is it drain. It's merely a penalty. The line that says "This penalty can't reduce a score below 1" is, I suspect, where the confusion pops up. It should probably say "This penalty can't reduce an effective bonus granted by an ability score lower than –5."
A penalty DOES effectively lower an ability score, but it's temporary. When we have an effect that does damage or drain, we're intending that effect to last as long as it takes to heal the damage by outside sources. When an ability score reducing effect has a built in duration, after which the reduction goes away, we use "ability score penalties" instead of damage.
As for why touch of idiocy can't effectively lower a score below zero... that's game balance to prevent a 2nd level spell from being able to instantly take down animals, who have Int scores of 1 or 2.
Hope that clears things up. If not, I'll try again.
FINAL NOTE: It's frustrating to me to see folks be confused by the rules, and I try to help where I can, but it's even MORE frustrating to come upon a thread that has several 1,000+ word posts to wade through before I can actually narrow down the question and figure out what's being asked. Short, concise questions are not only much more likely to get answers quickly, but they're more likely to be answered in the first place. Long posts DO make me tired; remember that my job is to work with rules and read game stuff all day anyway, usually stuff that's written by a freelancer and is a LOT more confusing than anything we eventually publish because the text hasn't yet been developed (that's my job).
A penalty DOES effectively lower an ability score, but it's temporary.
Here's what it says in the rules, though (as quoted by Zark above):
"Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1."
So ability penalties work just like ability damage (and therefore don't effectively lower an ability score unless ability damage does).
I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong I'm will simply try to explain what I don't get. OK?
Acording to the rules penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability.
The text doesn't state that they even reduce an ability temporarely. They only apply a penalty.
Later the rules explain how this damage/penalty affects each ability score.
There is no wording in the text that list all the penalties that casting spells or using feats will be affected. If they are then a fighter with str 16 hit by RoE that and get a -4 damage can't use Pwoer attack. Right? Ii this correct?
Touch of Idiocy confuesed me because it didn't fit with MY interpretation of the rules. As a result of that I also wondered how spells like Feeblemind, Bestow Curse and Blasphemy worked.
Will Bestow Curse prevent someone with a –6 decrease to an dex score of 18 using two weapon fighting, dodge etc?
James, thanks for your response. I'm still unclear on how ability penalties are supposed to interact with a character's abilities. This is the set of representative questions that I don't feel I have answers to:
1a) A 12th-level wizard with a 16 Intelligence takes a 3 point Intelligence penalty from Touch of Idiocy. What is the highest level spell he can cast, sixth or third?
1b) A 12th-level wizard with a 16 Intelligence takes 3 points of Intelligence damage. What is the highest level spell he can cast, sixth or third?
1c) A 12th-level wizard with a 16 Intelligence takes 3 points of Intelligence drain. What is the highest level spell he can cast, sixth or third?
2a) A fighter with 13 strength and the Power Attack feat takes a 3 point Strength penalty from Ray of Enfeeblement. Can he Power Attack?
2b) A fighter with 13 strength and the Power Attack feat takes 3 points of Strength Damage. Can he Power Attack?
2c) A fighter with 13 strength and the Power Attack feat takes 3 points of Strength Drain. Can he Power Attack?
Thanks again for even taking the time to looking at the forums considering everything else you have going on.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I just sat down and read through the rules for Ability Score damage, penalty, and drain on page 555 of the core rulebook, and it does indeed look like the rules don't work exactly as I thought. Part of the problem is that ability damage doesn't actually reduce an ability score's actual total, which is counterintuitive on some level.
So here goes.
Ability damage only results in a penalty to actions associated with that ability score; it does NOT make you lose access to feats or spells that require ability score minimums, since your actual ability score does not lower. Only ability DRAIN can make you lose access to spells you can cast or feats that have prerequisites.
But it's not that simple. Some effects that cause ability damage or ability penalties DO have additional effects. Touch of idiocy is one such spell, since it says in the spell's description that it affects the target's ability to cast some or all of its spells if the penalty imparted to the ability score drops low enough. This is an exception to the general rule for ability scores and applies only to touch of idiocy (the point of the spell, really, is to be a lesser version of feeblemind that screws over spellcasters, after all).
Ray of enfeeblement, on the other hand, does NOT have this type of language. It merely works as a normal penalty to an ability score.
So taking it that way...
1a) A 12th-level wizard with a 16 Intelligence takes a 3 point Intelligence penalty from Touch of Idiocy. What is the highest level spell he can cast, sixth or third?
Third.
1b) A 12th-level wizard with a 16 Intelligence takes 3 points of Intelligence damage. What is the highest level spell he can cast, sixth or third?
Sixth.
1c) A 12th-level wizard with a 16 Intelligence takes 3 points of Intelligence drain. What is the highest level spell he can cast, sixth or third?
Third.
2a) A fighter with 13 strength and the Power Attack feat takes a 3 point Strength penalty from Ray of Enfeeblement. Can he Power Attack?
Yes.
2b) A fighter with 13 strength and the Power Attack feat takes 3 points of Strength Damage. Can he Power Attack?
Yes.
2c) A fighter with 13 strength and the Power Attack feat takes 3 points of Strength Drain. Can he Power Attack?
No.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Touch of Idiocy confuesed me because it didn't fit with MY interpretation of the rules. As a result of that I also wondered how spells like Feeblemind, Bestow Curse and Blasphemy worked.
Will Bestow Curse prevent someone with a –6 decrease to an dex score of 18 using two weapon fighting, dodge etc?
As I mentioned in the post above, touch of idiocy has a special additional effect written into its description that allows its ability score penalties to actually impact the highest level spell that a spellcaster can cast.
The three other spells you mention, feeblemind, bestow curse, and blashpemy, actually REDUCE ability scores. This isn't damage, drain, or a penalty. It's the worst case scenario for ability scores, since effects like these can't be healed naturally, nor can they be fixed by restoration (generally). These types of effects have to be cured by specific spells (heal, etc. for feeblemind or anything that removes a curse for bestow curse) or the reduction is temporary and not as big a deal (such as with blasphemy).
Feeblemind: This spell drops INT and CHA to 1. It spells out pretty succinctly what this means for victims of the spell. This isn't damage, drain, or penalty. It just resets those scores to 1. This spell is really bad news. It probably should have been given an expensive material component to keep folks from casting it all the time or something.
Bestow Curse: This spell decreases your ability score. This effect works more or less like ability drain.
Blasphemy: This spell decreases your Strength score. This effect works more or less the same as ability drain, but we don't actually call it ability drain because it only lasts for 2d4 rounds before fixing itself. Ability drain can't fix itself anymore than hp damage can fix itself.
All of this is a pretty confusing change, to be honest, especially if you're used to how it all worked in 3.5. My gut tells me that the Pathfinder version IS easier... but not for a while if you're used to the 3.5 method.
it does indeed look like the rules don't work exactly as I thought. Part of the problem is that ability damage doesn't actually reduce an ability score's actual total, which is counterintuitive on some level.
So basically, having damage equal to your STR or DEX does not make you 'paralyzed' or even affect your Encumbrance at all? The same for having CON damage = CON score not killing you, and INT/WIS/CHA damage = INT/WIS/CHA score not making you comatose? Not to mention the 'normal' stuff like DEX damage preventing use of Greater 2WF...?
Basically, no matter how much STR damage you take, you are just as capable of carrying loads as ever, and in fact are still more capable of carrying loads than people who's 'undamaged' STR is normally less than yours (but higher than your [normal STR - STR damage]). ...Yeah, that's a wierd change, that I don't think I like.
|
Creative Director
|
So basically, having damage equal to your STR or DEX does not make you 'paralyzed' or even affect your Encumbrance at all? The same for having CON damage = CON score not killing you, and INT/WIS/CHA damage = INT/WIS/CHA score not making you comatose? Not to mention the 'normal' stuff like DEX damage preventing use of Greater 2WF...?
Basically, no matter how much STR damage you take, you are just as capable of carrying loads as ever, and in fact are still more capable of carrying loads than people who's 'undamaged' STR is normally less than yours (but higher than your [normal STR - STR damage]). ...Yeah, that's a wierd change.
Actually, no; I didn't say that at all, just that ability damage doesn't actually reduce your total score.
You still become paralyzed or die or whatever once your ability score damage equals your ability score. That's pretty much what the second paragraph under the Ability Score Damage, Penalty, and Drain section on page 555 says. Your actual ability scores don't decrease with damage, but you are still killed or terribly inconvenienced if the damage ever equals the total score.
I guess the best point of comparasion is to point to how normal damage and nonlethal damage work with hit points. Normal damage (like ability score drain) reduces your hit points (or your ability score). Nonlethal damage (or ability damage) adds up on its own separate "track" and when your nonlethal damage (or ability damage) equals your current hit points (or your current ability score), you are staggered (or die or are paralyzed or whatever).
Reading the rules states:
"For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability. If the amount of ability damage you have taken equals or exceeds your ability score, you immediately fall unconscious until the damage is less than your ability score. The only exception to this is your Constitution score. If the damage to your Constitution is equal to or greater than your Constitution score, you die. Unless otherwise noted, damage to your ability scores is healed at the rate of 1 per day to each ability score that has been damaged. Ability damage can be healed through the use of spells, such as lesser restoration. "
That is a quote from the ability score page:
Basically, no matter how much STR damage you take, you are just as capable of carrying loads as ever, and in fact are still more capable of carrying loads than people who's 'undamaged' STR is normally less than yours (but higher than your [normal STR - STR damage]). ...Yeah, that's a wierd change.Actually, no; I didn't say that at all, just that ability damage doesn't actually reduce your total score.
You still become paralyzed or die or whatever once your ability score damage equals your ability score. That's pretty much what the second paragraph under the Ability Score Damage, Penalty, and Drain section on page 555 says. Your actual ability scores don't decrease with damage, but you are still killed or terribly inconvenienced if the damage ever equals the total score.
OK... But by the RAW, Encumbrance isn't affected at all by STR damage, right?
I GUESS the line at the beginning COULD be read as applying to Encumbrance (), but it's sort of a stretch in that pretty much the rest of the section is just about the d20 modifier connected to stats - and I don't see how "Ability to Cast 5th level spells" (or bonus spell slots) are any less a "stat" than Encumbrance is, anyways.
I guess the best point of comparasion is to point to how normal damage and nonlethal damage work with hit points...
That's a great comparison, and in line how I understood ability damage worked... It just seems like non-lethal damage's implementation and effects are straight forward (and temporarily identical to effects of normal damage), while that isn't the case for ability damage. ...I guess this is another case where I'd prefer the approach that would need much shorter word-count anyways. (i.e. your stat is treated as being lower in all ways, but recovers naturally and you can't die from it, i.e. like Non-Lethal Damage)
It's also wierd that according to Ability Damage rules:
If the amount of ability damage you have taken equals or exceeds your ability score, you immediately fall unconscious until the damage is less than your ability score.
Yet that isn't the case for having 0 DEX normally:
(but not unconscious)[/B].
Thanks James!
I find your answer clear and conclusive.
I agree with you that the Pathfinder version IS easier... but not for a while if you're used to the 3.5 method.
Althougt you should probably inform Jason what confuse people is
A) Touch of idiocy. As AvalonXQ put it: the description [of the additional effect] isn't phrased as a modification, but rather as a reminder[...] Which makes it look like missed holdover text.
B) Feeblemind, Bestow Curse, Blasphemy.
But you have explained it to me and now I get it.
Feeblemind, Bestow Curse, Blasphemy "actually REDUCE ability scores. This isn't damage, drain, or a penalty. It's the worst case scenario for ability scores,"
touch of idiocy "has a special additional effect written into its description that allows its ability score penalties to actually impact the highest level spell that a spellcaster can cast", but it's still only give penalties so feats are not affected.
Again. I get it now. Thanks.
OK... But by the RAW, Encumbrance isn't affected at all by STR damage, right?
No encumbrance isn't affected. The rules list how each ability is affected.
I GUESS the line at the beginning COULD be read as applying to Encumbrance (), but it's sort of a stretch in that pretty much the rest of the section is just about the d20 modifier connected to stats - and I don't see how "Ability to Cast 5th level spells" (or bonus spell slots) are any less a "stat" than Encumbrance is, anyways.
No ability to cast spells are not any less a "stat" than encumbrance. Ability to Cast spells are not affected nor is encumbrance.
As James pointed out:- "touch of idiocy has a special additional effect written into its description that allows its ability score penalties to actually impact the highest level spell that a spellcaster can cast."
That's a great comparison, and in line how I understood ability damage worked... It just seems like non-lethal damage's implementation and effects are straight forward (and temporarily identical to effects of normal damage), while that isn't the case for ability damage. ...I guess this is another case where I'd prefer the approach that would need much shorter word-count anyways. (i.e. your stat is treated as being lower in all ways, but recovers naturally and you can't die from it, i.e. like Non-Lethal Damage)
You picked the quote out of it's context.
Damage and Penalty is NOT treated as being lower in all ways.Yet that isn't the case for having 0 DEX normally:
wrote:A character with a Dexterity score of 0 is incapable of moving and is effectively immobile (but not unconscious).
Give James a break. Acording to the rules on ability damage:
"If the amount of ability damage you have
taken equals or exceeds your ability score, you immediately
fall unconscious until the damage is less than your ability
score. The only exception to this is your Constitution score.
If the damage to your Constitution is equal to or greater
than your Constitution score, you die."
There might be other rules on dex 0, Int 0, etc, but these are the rules on how ability damage affect your abilities.
So how many HD does a two year old thread have?
I still don't get how they overlap.
I get ray of clumsy and exhaustion (-6 str/dex) are penalties, but I'm not sure if the "points" they contribute can get you below zero.
Say you ray of exhaustion a hill giant, and he takes 6 points of dex "penalty" then you hit him with a dex poison or a calcific touch. Does the final type of stat reduction determine the lasting effect? In this case, a "penalty" would top off at 1, a poison would render him unconscious at zero and a calcific touch would turn him to stone.
Another way of wording it- I do 4 points of str penalty to someone with a 12 str and then 8 points of str damage. Is he uncon. or at 1 str?
1 strength.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Google topic, find thread discussing similar matter to topic as question, post said question in thread instead of starting new topic
If my method is somehow different from the Pathfinder message board posting norms I sincerely apologize.
No no no! I approve! PLEASE NECRO instead of rehashing the same points, this way the conversation isn't lost, and we don't have to go over it all again, we can simply pick up the new questions and there are fewer repeat threads.
Google topic, find thread discussing similar matter to topic as question, post said question in thread instead of starting new topic
If my method is somehow different from the Pathfinder message board posting norms I sincerely apologize.
It is ok. Many times doing the research is the best way to find an answer.
No matter whether you start a new thread or necro an old one someone will complain.PS: Talonhawke may have been joking, but I don't know for sure. In any event myself and Mr.Spalding agree.
Google topic, find thread discussing similar matter to topic as question, post said question in thread instead of starting new topic
If my method is somehow different from the Pathfinder message board posting norms I sincerely apologize.
It is ok. Many times doing the research is the best way to find an answer.
No matter whether you start a new thread or necro an old one someone will complain.PS: Talonhawke may have been joking, but I don't know for sure. In any event myself and Mr.Spalding agree.
Joking unless the DM is running a game in modern time then i need to know because of the Wis Damage a good thread can do to my enemies.
1 strength.
damn. Though I guess I understand eliminating the one round 10 dex great wyrm kills. (quickened dex ray plus one or two rays of exhaustion)
What is quickened dex?
I am assuming it is some APG or UM spell that removes dex, but Sloanzilla used the wrong name?
Well there isn't a ray but there is touch of clumsiness which could be combined with reach spell to get the equivalent.
The bonus on touch of clumsiness is if they fail the save they might fall when moving.
Well there isn't a ray but there is touch of clumsiness which could be combined with reach spell to get the equivalent.
The bonus on touch of clumsiness is if they fail the save they might fall when moving.
I will have to be sure not to tell my players about this.
|
|
Pardon the thread necro, but I figure it's better to keep on topic than start a whole new thread.
Some interesting stuff in here, including James' explanations. There's one thing I just read, however, that caught my eye:
From the ability score page Abe quoted:
"For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability. If the amount of ability damage you have taken equals or exceeds your ability score, you immediately fall unconscious until the damage is less than your ability score. The only exception to this is your Constitution score. If the damage to your Constitution is equal to or greater than your Constitution score, you die. Unless otherwise noted, damage to your ability scores is healed at the rate of 1 per day to each ability score that has been damaged. Ability damage can be healed through the use of spells, such as lesser restoration. "
Notice the bold part. It specifically says "for every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability". This suggests that even if you had an even score in an ability, and took 1 damage to it, nothing would happen. Example:
A character with 16 Dex takes 1 Dex damage (say from a poison that rolled low). Nothing actually happens, though, because in order to start applying a -1 penalty to stuff, at least 2 points of damage would need to be taken. Am I interpreting this correctly?