| 12 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. |
...You fuse your thoughts with an ally's, allowing the two of you to fight in tandem, perfectly coordinated. You and the ally each roll initiative in combat and use the higher die result before adding modifiers. This has three effects.
Melee or Ranged: If you both make melee attacks against the same creature, you both make attack rolls and both use the higher of the two dice for your attack rolls (plus bonuses).
Ranged: If you both make ranged attacks against the same creature, you both make attack rolls and both use the higher of the two dice for your attack roll (plus bonuses).
Spell: If you both cast spells and target the same area or same creature, affected creatures take a –2 penalty on their saving throw against the spells.
First part easy, no issue there since initiative is rolled at the same time and no question if it occurs.
"Melee or Ranged:" Ok first editing error, should be just Melee since there is a ranged line that says the exact same thing for range.
The real issue is when does the extra dice rolling occur and what if we have different number of attacks?
Wizard casts this on himself and his two kukri wielding fighter with boots of speed. Lets assume the wizard is getting 2 attacks in melee a round and the fighter is getting 6.
The wizard casts battlemind link and the fighter kicks down the door. Though the people inside were ready, no surprise round. Inside the room are 6 tough bad guys.
The fighter wins initiative (better dex then the wizard) He charges in and stabs a guy. Does he get to roll 2 dice at this point in time since the wizard wants to stab the same guy?
The wizard runs in and stabs the same guy, Do they now each roll a dice and pick the better roll and use it for their next attack? or just for the wizards attack.
They get surrounded.
Next round the fighter attacks 6 bad guys. Only rolling his own dice? And if he attacks the one the wizard attack they would both roll again or use the roll he made with the wizard last round as his attack roll for this round? Or do they both roll again and pick the highest for the fighters attack roll.
The wizard casts transformation and draws his other dagger.
All 6 bad guys are still alive and attack doing a little damage. The fighter laughs. They overestimated the bad guys and he wants to let his wizard friend have fun.
Beginning of the 3rd round the fighter decides to just go full defensive and watch the wizard have fun stabbing the bad guys.
The wizard makes 4 attacks. Since the fighter has already attacked everybody once while the spell was up do they both roll dice and the wizard pick the highest? If yes does this happen until the end of the spell duration?
What if the fighter wants to start stabbing again? Does he have to keep track of the numbers they rolled together to be used as attack rolls and therefore already knows how he will roll for a few attacks?
No takers on this one?
Has anybody used this spell before?
Yeah, that spell could use some FAQ'ing up.
I always read it as your initiative becoming essentially the same, so you would act simultaneously, and really be able to coordinate your actions. But I can see how the "...before adding modifiers" part could go against that, I guess. But I think that's the only way the spell really makes sense.
And that is the issue, the way the spell would make most sense, does not actually work because of the... "You and the ally each roll initiative in combat and use the higher die result before adding modifiers." line. It is not terribly hard to rework the spell into something usable, but only the DM gets to do that at the table, so it would be nice if Paizo chimed in on this glitched spell.
I agree the only way it seems to work logically is both creatures are treated as one creature in initiative order. Which breaks the rules a little since now you have to creatures acting at the exact same time. If they both move in at the same time around a creature which would the creature get its AoO against? Would it be its choice? Or is one a little faster then the other.
If you go on the same init then it looks like the first part should read taking the highest die roll and add the highest modifier.
Without acting as one creature in init just adds to many "what ifs" to the spell.
Has anybody ever actually used this? What are other people calls on this spell?
It would be great if some developers chimed in.
Thanks!
I looked at it, thought it was amazingly cool, thought about it some more and realized how many grey areas the spell involved, and then promptly decided I'd never use it until I saw an official errata.
How about a Christmas present from one of the developers to give us some input on Battlemind Link!
|
I looked at it, thought it was amazingly cool, thought about it some more and realized how many grey areas the spell involved, and then promptly decided I'd never use it until I saw an official errata.
Another words, never.
Although they need to, I'm not sure if they would want to do that, since then lots of spells might need errata as well.
True, but most spells that need erratas are at least workable and have grey areas.
Battlemind Link is a big question mark. Only the first part makes sense the rest is as if someone hits you with confusion and you end up attacking the book in frustration screaming "how am I suppose to run this!" or "I am battling my mind looking for links to answer this!"
Could at least give us a little tid bit, something, anything. I am not asking for a full errata, maybe at least the orignal intent and how they envisioned it working.
Well the holiday season is over, so hopefully the Devs are all back now.
Any Dev want to give any input, official or gut feeling on this one PLEASE!!!
Well the holiday season is over, so hopefully the Devs are all back now.
Any Dev want to give any input, official or gut feeling on this one PLEASE!!!
Yea- ... I could use some input on this too.
I was thinking about taking this spell this level myself.
Really hoping to hear a definitive answer on this one as a divination specialist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After a bit of discussion and consideration, I see one easy way to tweak the wording of this spell and make all the timing/future action concerns disappear. The real problem with it lies in how to rule a changing battlefield and intended vs. actual actions.
*****
This is the problem section, to my mind at least.
From the original spell at: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/battlemind-link
"You fuse your thoughts with an ally’s, allowing the two of you to fight in tandem, perfectly coordinated. You and the ally each roll initiative in combat and use the higher die result before adding modifiers."
******
If you re-worded it to:
"You fuse your thoughts with an ally’s, allowing the two of you to fight in tandem, perfectly coordinated. You and the ally each roll initiative in combat and use the higher total result result after adding modifiers. Both you and your ally plan and carry out your actions together at the same time."
Then you no longer have to worry about timing actions, and at worst the linked duo deals overkill to some targets. If they were making attacks, Ranged or Melee, I would allow them to assess the results of their attacks in sequential order (ie both resolve their first attack, then second, ect)so that the duo can make judgements on how to proceed as their action goes by.
sigh.
Obviously this spell is a logistically nightmare to execute. I agree for the spell to work, the players have to be on the same initiative. If they ever are on a different initiative, the benefits should not apply until they synch back up. So the ally with the higher initiative modifier will have to delay for both to benefit. Here's how I'd rewrite the spell:
"You fuse your thoughts with an ally’s, allowing the two of you to fight in tandem, perfectly coordinated. You and the ally each roll initiative in combat and use the higher die result before adding modifiers. When both allies act on the same initiative, it has three effects.
Melee: For each melee attack you simultaneously make against the same creature, you both make attack rolls and both use the higher of the two dice for your attack rolls (plus bonuses).
Ranged: For each ranged attack you simultaneously make against the same creature, you both make attack rolls and both use the higher of the two dice for your attack roll (plus bonuses).
Spell: For each spell you simultaneously cast and target the same area or same creature, affected creatures take a –2 penalty on their saving throw against the spells. It is possible to receive this benefit twice with quickened spells.
You and the target lose these benefits if you cannot see each other or if you or the target is unconscious or helpless."
*Deep Res*
Was there ever an official ruling on this before 2E came out?
My group made a different ruling:
Ally A attacks enemy; receives no benefit. A gets 2 attacks and records the d20 results of both
Ally B attacks the same enemy. B gets 4 attacks. On his first 2 rolls, he takes the higher d20 results between his own attacks and A’s recorded d20 rolls. His third and forth rolls are made normally. B records all 4 of his own d20 results.
Before A goes again, the Bard casts Haste.
On A’s next turn, he gets 3 attacks. He makes his attacks, and uses the higher rolls between his own and B’s first 3 rolls. A records his 3 d20 results.
On B’s next turn, he gets to take the highest between his first three d20 rolls, and A’s. B’s forth attack roll is not affected.
This pattern resets anytime a new target is attacked. A simpler version of this pattern can be applied to the spellcasting version. This pattern can be used regardless of how far separated A and B are from each other in initiative.
Fairly positive there was no official errata.
I just ruled on it and came to the same decision as Aoth Anskuld - the targets must act on the same initiative to get the benefit. In my player's case, that might be a mount and rider.. or a mount and other pc, which gets weirder. Agree with Beaujest it's a logistical nightmare to run regardless.
I'd say it's very important to point out there's a very good chance this spell would be cast *after* initiative is rolled, it's only minute/level. If I were to fiddle with the initiative wording to force identical, I'd go with higher roll and lower modifier, not the best of both. That's giving the benefit to the low roller, and making the higher modifier wait (which could be the same person).
If I didn't enjoy handling funky mechanics, would straight out ban this, for multiple reasons. Minutes long bit of luck is pretty outrageous.
I'm sure it shows up on some other lists as a bonus spell, but the Inquisitor doesn't get it until 10, a Wizard at level 11, and a Qinggong Monk at 12... I don't see this as something that comes up enough to be a problem.
Whatever you decide at the table when it shows up is the way it works for that game. Chances are that is the only time it will occur anyways.
It's worded poorly to everyone. So it's hard to confidently build a strategy around it and risk it being complete garbage in the middle of a CR10/11/12 encounter...
That "Answered in the FAQ" at the top of the thread suggests that someone at Paizo thought they'd put something in which addressed this. Dunno what though, I couldn't find anything.
VM, it could also be accessed by someone with a 1000 gp scroll, or by a samsaran cleric 7, or one of the other ways of getting off-list spells.