| 6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After my wizard made an intelligence check to determine that the cavern we were in was unstable, I asked the party barbarian to make a strength check to knock over the support pillar that had been placed some deacdes ago.
It was wedged really, really tight and he was unable to accomplish the task. So I cast bull's strength on him and asked him to try again.
However, the GM interjected at this point and siad that bull's strength would not give him any kind of bonus on an ability check, in fact, none of the ability increasing spells would give a bonus on any ability check.
I looked up the rule for myself (pages 554-555) and he seems to be right. A temporary ability boost only gives you partial benefit. Only long duration boosts give you the full benefit inherent to an actual ability score increase.
Was this an oversight? Shouldn't a temporary increase help in something as simple as ability checks? I find it odd that bear's endurance would not allow me to hold my breath longer, or Fox's cunning wouldn't aid my intelligence check to find a weakness in a structure.
|
I was under the impression that it would help ability checks as well. Seeing as how "ability checks" are basically an expression for "skill check that they either don't have ranks for or is too obscure or specific to have a skill or cannot be practiced and thus has no skill." Note that the temporary bonuses *do* boost skill checks.
I think your DM is reading a bit too strictly and assuming that because the stat check isn't specifically called out it isn't affected by the temporary bonus. Frankly, that doesn't make much sense at all. Since skill checks are specifically included, how does it make sense to apply the bonus when the stat is used for a defined skill but not when the stat is used for a case where there is no defined skill? In either case, the character is using his strength - shouldn't the bonus apply whether there is a specific skill or not?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
You are, of course, correct.
To the OP's GM - if the STR boost modifies to hit, damage, and STR based checks, why would it apply differently to STR checks?
Where does it say that?
Ah, but that's not what it says. I've bolded the part of your sentence that's misleading. The rule in question (also viewable here) specifically calls out skill checks. Now, ability checks may be kinda like untrained skill checks, but they're not the same thing. They're named differently, referenced separately, and it's up to you to provide a reference that states "bonuses that apply to skill checks also apply to ability checks." Much like in the Using Skills section, it notes that the take-10 and take-20 rules can be used with Ability Checks (which wouldn't have to be called out if they were in fact, just skills).
That's the RAW. I personally don't like this logic. If you cast a spell to make me stronger, I should get all the benefits of being stronger. That includes ability checks, and carrying capacity/lifting ability for that matter. However, if I were to rule that way as a GM, it's a house rule, plain and simple.
|
Logically I think it makes more than a little bit of sense.
Yes you are suddenly stronger/more agile/wittier. But you are not normally so, and you don't really know how to command this new found power to its fullest.
Ability checks are (generally) the kind of checks that require nearly 100% of your strength in any given task. Breaking down a DC 25 door is going to take ALL of your strength to do. You may not be used to handling this extra muscle or what-have-you and cant really take a advantage of it.
To me it draws similar to the old phrase "Give a man a fish, Feed him for a day- Teach a man to fish, Feed him for a lifetime."
Where giving the man a fish is a temporary boost that won't really help him help himself.
Teaching him to fish would be giving him a more permanent boost such as a belt of giants strength or other quasi-permanent boost.
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
To the OP's GM - if the STR boost modifies to hit, damage, and STR based checks, why would it apply differently to STR checks?
Where does it say that?
It doesn't say that. What it doesn't explicitly state (in that one section) is that temporary ability bonuses apply to ability checks. This would be assumed that ability checks and skill checks fall under the same category. But the rules also don't state that I can't use a spiked shield to make shredded cheese. This just seems like a DM trying to be a rules lawyer to limit his player's good ideas.
But since this DM seems to want to be a book lawyer and hamper his players from having fun I have decide to consult the rules about the use of bull's strength to increase a players ability score check:
Page 554 states that temporary ability score bonuses apply to ..."the skills and STATISTICS LISTED WITH THE RELEVANT ABILITY."
Page 15-16 states that.."The modifier(ability modifier)is the number you apply to the die roll when your character tries to do something related to that ability."
Page 16 states that the Strength modifier applies to.... "Strength checks (for breaking down doors and the like)."
Page 251 states under the heading of bulls strength..."The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength, adding the usual benefits to melee attack rolls, melee damage roles, AND OTHER USES OF THE STRENGTH MODIFIER."
So... it would appear that the DM doesn't fully understand the rules and doesn't use common sense when applying the rules that he does understand. I don't mean to be so negative, but I hate when DM's hamper the player's creativity or deny the players the use of their abilities just because they outwitted him/her.
/end rant
Bull ’s Strength
School transmutation; Level cleric 2, druid 2, paladin 2, sorcerer/
wizard 2
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (a few hairs, or a pinch of dung, from
a bull)
Range touch
Target creature touched
Duration 1 min./level
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
The subject becomes stronger. The spell grants a +4
enhancement bonus to Strength, adding the usual benefits to
melee attack rolls, melee damage rolls, and other uses of the
Strength modifier.
Such as ability checks.
Page 251 states under the heading of bulls strength..."The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength, adding the usual benefits to melee attack rolls, melee damage roles, AND OTHER USES OF THE STRENGTH MODIFIER."
This. This is pretty clear.
|
|
Page 251 states under the heading of bulls strength..."The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength, adding the usual benefits to melee attack rolls, melee damage roles, AND OTHER USES OF THE STRENGTH MODIFIER."This. This is pretty clear.
Yes, but notice the distinct lack of such a clause in both the Rage ability and the Rage spell. It is also missing in the Mutagen class feature. I'm sure it's also missing in many other strength boosting features to which this question would apply.
Not to be terse, but this is something that needs a bit more general of an answer that many rules assume exists. If your general answer is "Only bull's strength and similarly worded abilities modify ability checks" then that's ripe for house-ruling. Then again, I believe someone mentioned that the ability damage/drain text reads the same way as the temporary bonus strength, with very odd implications.|
|
Yes, but notice the distinct lack of such a clause in both the Rage ability and the Rage spell.
p.32 "... Temporary increases to Constitution, such as those gained from rage and spells like bear's endurance do not increase THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ROUNDS a barbarian can rage per day."
This in no way states that that the temporary ability bonuses are now not used on skill checks and ability checks.
In reading the rage spell (p. 329) I can find no wording that would limit it's affect on ability checks. "Otherwise identical with a barbarian's rage except that the subjects aren't fatigued at the end of the rage."
What am I missing here? The rules on this seem very clear.
n reading the rage spell (p. 329) I can find no wording that would limit it's affect on ability checks. "Otherwise identical with a barbarian's rage except that the subjects aren't fatigued at the end of the rage."
What am I missing here? The rules on this seem very clear.
You´re missing that the rules on Temporary Ability Stat increases don´t allow using the bonus for Ability Checks in the first place. The limitation is in the general rule, not the spells or abilities, which can make an exception (like Bull´s Strength) and provide further functionaltity than generic Temp Ability Bonuses if they so desire.
|
|
p. 554 "For every two points of increase to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and STATISTICS LISTED WITH THE RELEVANT ABILITY."
There is no need for creative interpretation. If you get a bonus that makes you stronger, you are stronger for that amount of time. That is logical right? It's also supported by the rules and common sense. To argue otherwise is, as another poster commented, "just silly."
I will stop responding to this thread at this point.
p. 554 "For every two points of increase to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and STATISTICS LISTED WITH THE RELEVANT ABILITY."
There is no need for creative interpretation. If you get a bonus that makes you stronger, you are stronger for that amount of time. That is logical right? It's also supported by the rules and common sense. To argue otherwise is, as another poster commented, "just silly."
Hear, hear.
Sounds to me like a rules contradiction.
Sounds to me like a rules contradiction.
How so? I must be tired, I'm not seeing it.
Sounds to me like a rules contradiction.How so? I must be tired, I'm not seeing it.
I might have misread what was being said.
So, does a temporary bonus to an ability score add to ability checks (NOT skill checks) or not?
It adds to both Ability and skill checks.
So, does a temporary bonus to an ability score add to ability checks (NOT skill checks) or not?
But where does it say that? Is it because of p. 554's "For every two points of increase to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and STATISTICS LISTED WITH THE RELEVANT ABILITY."?
Because that seems to be referencing the skills and statistics IN THE NEXT SECTION, not the other areas of the book.
But where does it say that?It adds to both Ability and skill checks.
So, does a temporary bonus to an ability score add to ability checks (NOT skill checks) or not?
Really? Does it have to say it? Seriously?
So you're saying it works like this:
Player: I want to lift the heavy thing.
DM: You can't, you're not strong enough.
Player: No worries. I cast Bull's Strength to increase my Strength score.
DM: OK.
Player: Now I lift the heavy thing.
DM: You can't.
Player: Why not? I increased my Strength score, right?
DM: Yeah, but, uh, increasing your Strength score doesn't make you stronger because, well, you didn't increase your, um, strongerness. Yeah, that's it. You didn't increase your strongerness.
That's the way we want to arbitrate tmporary ability gains?
Balderdash!
Really? Does it have to say it? Seriously?
So you're saying it works like this:
Player: I want to lift the heavy thing.
DM: You can't, you're not strong enough.
Player: No worries. I cast Bull's Strength to increase my Strength score.
DM: OK.
Player: Now I lift the heavy thing.
DM: You can't.
Player: Why not? I increased my Strength score, right?
DM: Yeah, but, uh, increasing your Strength score doesn't make you stronger because, well, you didn't increase your, um, strongerness. Yeah, that's it. You didn't increase your strongerness.That's the way we want to arbitrate tmporary ability gains?
Balderdash!
That's not the way I want it to be, but that's exactly what the RAW seems to be saying. Temporary ability increases only grant benefits to very specific things as listed on pages 554-555 of the Pathfinder core rulebook.
|
|
Sounds to me like a rules contradiction.
There is no contradiction. A change in an ability score results in a "+1 bonus to the skills and STATISTICS LISTED WITH THE RELEVANT ABILITY."
The statement 'temporary increases to your Strength score give you a bonus on Strength-based skill checks' in no way contradicts the first statement. If it said 'temporary increases to your Strength score do not give you a bonus on Strength checks' then it would be a contradiction.
That's not the way I want it to be, but that's exactly what the RAW seems to be saying. Temporary ability increases only grant benefits to very specific things as listed on pages 554-555 of the Pathfinder core rulebook.Really? Does it have to say it? Seriously?
So you're saying it works like this:
Player: I want to lift the heavy thing.
DM: You can't, you're not strong enough.
Player: No worries. I cast Bull's Strength to increase my Strength score.
DM: OK.
Player: Now I lift the heavy thing.
DM: You can't.
Player: Why not? I increased my Strength score, right?
DM: Yeah, but, uh, increasing your Strength score doesn't make you stronger because, well, you didn't increase your, um, strongerness. Yeah, that's it. You didn't increase your strongerness.That's the way we want to arbitrate tmporary ability gains?
Balderdash!
Nowhere on those pages does it say those are the only things that are affected. Maybe that's just an incomplete list. Maybe the authors only listed the stuff they thought anyone would actually ask questions about. Maybe the authors just didn't think they needed to mention that increasing an ability score makes you better at, you know, using that ability score.
Nowhere on those pages does it say those are the only things that are affected. Maybe that's just an incomplete list. Maybe the authors only listed the stuff they thought anyone would actually ask questions about. Maybe the authors just didn't think they needed to mention that increasing an ability score makes you better at, you know, using that ability score.
Please watch the tone of your post. The bold/italics comes off as very condescending.
In any case, if it is a sample list of things that are affected (rather than a complete list) then that would make a lot more sense.
If that is the case, however, what is the difference between a temporary ability bonus (which lasts less than a day) and a permanent ability bonus (which lasts more than a day)?
Nowhere on those pages does it say those are the only things that are affected. Maybe that's just an incomplete list. Maybe the authors only listed the stuff they thought anyone would actually ask questions about. Maybe the authors just didn't think they needed to mention that increasing an ability score makes you better at, you know, using that ability score.
Please watch the tone of your post. The bold/italics comes off as very condescending.
In any case, if it is a sample list of things that are affected (rather than a complete list) then that would make a lot more sense.
If that is the case, however, what is the difference between a temporary ability bonus (which lasts less than a day) and a permanent ability bonus (which lasts more than a day)?
Virtually nothing, except you don't get bonus, say, spells per day or rounds of rage or rounds of bardic performance due to a temporary increase.
You got dev posts. Ability check are intended to be included.
The dev post didn't strike me as being very clear in its own right.
So let me see if I understand it correctly, the ability modifier goes up, and any numerical value that uses that modifier is affected, but bonus spells, additional hit points, and things that aren't a numerical value remain unaffected.
How do you tell the difference? 10 rounds of rage is most certainly a numerical value effected by an ability modifier.
The shortest version probably is: any *rolls* based on that ability use the temporary or permanent ability modifier.
You don't roll bonus spells, bonus hit points, rage rounds, numbers of uses of channel energy, and so on. You do roll ability checks, skill checks, break checks, damage, saving throws, attack rolls, and so on.
The shortest version probably is: any *rolls* based on that ability use the temporary or permanent ability modifier.
You don't roll bonus spells, bonus hit points, rage rounds, numbers of uses of channel energy, and so on. You do roll ability checks, skill checks, break checks, damage, saving throws, attack rolls, and so on.
Thank you for the clarification.
I still don't see where that is explicitly described in the book though. Something for the FAQ perhaps?
The shortest version probably is: any *rolls* based on that ability use the temporary or permanent ability modifier.
You don't roll bonus spells, bonus hit points, rage rounds, numbers of uses of channel energy, and so on. You do roll ability checks, skill checks, break checks, damage, saving throws, attack rolls, and so on.
Thank you for the clarification.
I still don't see where that is explicitly described in the book though. Something for the FAQ perhaps?
I really don't think so. Sorry if it comes off as condescending, but to most that is intuitively obvious. And for the record, as with rage, you do get more HP from a temporary increase in CON, but they go away when the effect ends.
If your str goes up by 2, your str bonus goes up by 1. Simple. Therefore everything that you add your Str to you would add 1 more to. It's arithmetic ffs.
You don't gain things like rage rounds or bonus spells because those are things you need to rest for to get. Just like if you level in the middle of a dungeon, and your next level would give you another spell slot, it isn't in fact filled with a spell because you didn't memorize that yet. This keeps silliness like an effect that gives you a +2 to int that lasts just long enough for you to memorize spells so you get an extra spell slot. Or hey I leveled while I had cat's grace cast on me so I can choose Combat Reflexes as a feat. No, not a permanent bonus so no dice.
That's the only reason the language is there is to prevent abuse of temporary modifiers to get benefits outside the pervue of rolls or linear numerical benefits.
I still don't see where that is explicitly described in the book though. Something for the FAQ perhaps?
It's the collection of different rules in different areas that spells it out in total. Folks have quoted a bunch of rules from a bunch of areas that sum up to what SKR is telling you. You've got to admit... this is the first time since PFRPG was released that anyone's asked this, so it's hardly frequently asked. <Grin>
But seriously, it boils down to this: abilities that work on a generally 24-hour cycle don't benefit from ability score changes that last less than 24 hours.
That's it. Spells you get back once a day. Rage points, lay-on-hands, channel energy... all on a 24-hour cycle. So a up-to-20-minutes-at-20th-level change to those stats don't last long enough to help. Hit points you get back once a day, so same deal. Anything that is immediate in nature benefit right away.
Your DM is doing it wrong. Not a big deal, but you can gently reference the rules and the reason and that should do it unless he's unreasonable. But you're not going to find a single line that says "bull's strength applies to Strength checks to open stuck doors in Ravingdork's player campaign" because there isn't such a specific rule.
There's more to it.
I think this was done primarily because of Strength damage. With Strength damage, you gain a penalty to a whole bunch of other things, and some of those become cumulative with the actual loss of Strength.
A Fighter wearing Medium armor and carrying a light load, when damaged for a few points of Strength, loses some of his attack bonus (say it was +2 and drops to +1, +0, -1). In addition, under the 3.5 rules, his gear goes from being a minor encumbrance to being more than he can carry.. he suffers additional penalties to his attacks and damage for being overloaded, which makes Strength damage a "double whammy".
So the Pathfinder rules changed. You do not reduce (or increase) the actual ability score for temporary changes. You do apply a penalty (or bonus) to checks made using that score. The rules list what those bonuses are applied to for each Ability score.
It seems intuitively obvious, I agree, that Ability checks would also be affected. However, since the rules actually state that Hit Points are gained and lost through this (hit points are listed among the things affected by the bonuses and penalties for Constitution), it is not limited entirely to the d20 based checks made. That is what opens the "can of worms" about what is listed, and what is not listed.
It is also possible that PFS players might need the clarification made official for use there.
You've got to admit... this is the first time since PFRPG was released that anyone's asked this, so it's hardly frequently asked. <Grin>
To my knowledge, no, this SPECIFIC question hasn't been asked before. However I've seen a number of discussions in which people talk about how nothing is affected by ability increases/decreases unless it is specifically called out on that list (on pages 554-555), and about how that makes some nonsensical situations (such as the one I described, or encumbrance brought up, up thread).
Since ability checks aren't on that list, it stands to reason that some of those people would agree with my GM's interpretation.
Since ability checks aren't on that list, it stands to reason that some of those people would agree with my GM's interpretation.
The spells mentioned in the original post cover some of the typical spells for temporary bonuses to ability scores - Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance, etc. Within those spell descriptions it indicates these bonuses can be used for ability score checks. In Bull's Strength it says "...and other uses of the Strength modifier." and in Bear's Endurance it says "... Constitution checks...". Why ignore this, but cling dearly to p554-555?
However I've seen a number of discussions in which people talk about how nothing is affected by ability increases/decreases unless it is specifically called out on that list (on pages 554-555), and about how that makes some nonsensical situations (such as the one I described, or encumbrance brought up, up thread).
I think you hit it with how sometimes clinging to the statements on p554-555 results in nonsensical situations. We're GMs, we are allowed to use our common sense when it comes to adjudicating a decision or interpretation of a rule.
The rule designers cannot possibly cover every single oddity that might arise between rules written one section of the rulebook to ones written in another. To try to do so would lead to even more complex rulebooks and ones that read more like a law written in legalese than a rulebook that is meant to be used to play a game and have some fun with friends.
The spells mentioned in the original post cover some of the typical spells for temporary bonuses to ability scores - Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance, etc. Within those spell descriptions it indicates these bonuses can be used for ability score checks. In Bull's Strength it says "...and other uses of the Strength modifier." and in Bear's Endurance it says "... Constitution checks...". Why ignore this, but cling dearly to p554-555?
And even if that entry were gospel, specific trumps general does it not? Would not the specific spell overrule the general rule for these situations?
And even if that entry were gospel, specific trumps general does it not? Would not the specific spell overrule the general rule for these situations?
I would certainly agree with this.
Ability Checks are not a separate `statistic` to apply something to, like Concentration Rating, CMB/CMD, Sanity Ratings, etc..
They are a direct application of your Ability Score`s Bonus to a d20 roll.
Since it`s affecting people`s games (see OP) this would be nice to see Errata on when that is put out.
And as mentioned, this has been brought up before though I believe without receiving any posts from Paizo.
The rule designers cannot possibly cover every single oddity that might arise between rules written one section of the rulebook to ones written in another.
No, but they can write what they mean.
You really don`t have to throw in the `OH if we did what these horrible people pointing out flaws wanted, the rule book would have to be twice as big` line.The rules CAN be written clearly and concisely, expressing the RAI accurately without being any longer than they currently are.
There`s plenty of cases where the current RAW is longer than necessary WITHOUT clarifying anything.
Ability Checks are not a separate `statistic` to apply something to, like Concentration Rating, CMB/CMD, Sanity Ratings, etc..
They are a direct application of your Ability Score`s Bonus to a d20 roll.Since it`s affecting people`s games (see OP) this would be nice to see Errata on when that is put out.
Though the OP deals with Bull's Strength where it is clearly stated in the spell description "The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength, adding the usual benefits to melee attack rolls, melee damage rolls, and other uses of the Strength modifier."
The GM referenced in the OP appears to have ruled against what is written in the spell description.
However, the GM interjected at this point and siad that bull's strength would not give him any kind of bonus on an ability check, in fact, none of the ability increasing spells would give a bonus on any ability check.
Your GM is wrong about what the rules say. All six "animal" spells that boost stats add to ability checks.
Bear's Endurance: The spell grants the subject a +4 enhancement bonus to Constitution, which adds the usual benefits to hit points, Fortitude saves, Constitution checks, and so forth.
Bull's Strength: The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Strength, adding the usual benefits to melee attack rolls, melee damage rolls, and other uses of the Strength modifier.
Cat's Grace: The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Dexterity, adding the usual benefits to AC, Reflex saves, and other uses of the Dexterity modifier.
Eagle's Splendor: The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Charisma, adding the usual benefits to Charisma-based skill checks and other uses of the Charisma modifier.
Fox's Cunning: The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Intelligence, adding the usual benefits to Intelligence-based skill checks and other uses of the Intelligence modifier.
Owl's Wisdom: The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Wisdom, adding the usual benefit to Wisdom-related skills.
The reference about temporary vs. long duration ability boosts applies to things such as additional skill points for Int boosts, additional spells for relevant casting ability boosts, et cetera, not ability checks.
Mark L. Chance | Spes Magna Games
The GM referenced in the OP appears to have ruled against what is written in the spell description.
Actually, the OP's GM is just being very literal in following the RAW.
The spells, as quoted, apply a temporary enhancement bonus to Strength. How temporary bonuses to Strength work are spelled out on pages 554 and 555. They do not, as written, apply to Ability Checks, because they apply only to a specific list of checks for each Ability Score, none of which mention Ability checks.
I am fine with "understanding" that they mean all d20 rolls involving the ability score.
The shortest version probably is: any *rolls* based on that ability use the temporary or permanent ability modifier.
You don't roll bonus spells, bonus hit points, rage rounds, numbers of uses of channel energy, and so on. You do roll ability checks, skill checks, break checks, damage, saving throws, attack rolls, and so on
However, contradicting Sean K Reynolds' post, a specific example he gave of what is not affected (hit points) is contradicted by the specific rules in question.
Constitution: Temporary increases to your Constitution score give you a bonus on your Fortitude saving throws. In addition,multiply your total Hit Dice by this bonus and add that amount to your current and total hit points. When the bonus ends, remove this total from your current and total hit points.
If a developer's understanding can be directly opposed by the written rules, how can anyone else be expected to "know" how it works correctly? How can it not need to be corrected with errata?
I would modify Sean's post to read:
any *rolls* based on that ability, and specific secondary statistics as identified for each Ability Score, use the temporary or permanent ability modifier.
Actually, the OP's GM is just being very literal in following the RAW.
Literally following the RAW does not include ignoring the RAW. The DM in question clearly ignored the text of the spell in question.
Mark L. Chance | Spes Magna Games
Actually, the OP's GM is just being very literal in following the RAW.
The GM referenced in the OP appears to have ruled against what is written in the spell description.
Incorrect. As I pointed out earlier, specific text in the spell trumps the general rule which was, I admit, poorly written. Nonetheless, common sense should prevail.
any *rolls* based on that ability, and specific secondary statistics as identified for each Ability Score, use the temporary or permanent ability modifier.
Fair enough. I could try to weasel my way out of my earlier goof, but I'm not gonna try.
In any case, the idea that "a bonus to your Strength doesn't actually make you stronger regarding rolls based on Strength" is a silly argument. :p
In any case, by way of his alternate class abilities from the APG my transmuter can give himself or another an enhancement bonus to an ability score. Even if the spells specifically say that the modifier is effected, there are still plenty of other things that grant temporary bonuses and DON'T specifically say that (size bonuses from polymorph effects for example).
As such I think it should be FAQ'd for clarification.
No. ;)