So here they go and sorry if they are mixed and not related:
1) So ranged attacks underwater have a -2 penalty to hit for every 5 feet square they have to pass, do that penalty apply to rays?
2) Bludeoning and slashing attacks deal half their damage underwater, is this intended to apply also to natural attacks? Does this mean that a squid or a kraken are dealing only half their damage with their tentacles?
3) Assuming that you are fighting with a morning star do you do half or all the damage while attacking underwater?
4) So alchemists' bombs are thrown splash weapons and they hit touch AC, does this means that Deadly Aim feat does not apply?
5) I'm always failing on translating the Gaze of Flames revelation. Does it means:
A. You use a source of fire that is between 10 feet per oracle level and you can see with your normal sight
or
B. You can use a source of fire that is in the spell's range (400 ft + 40 ft per level) and your sight through it is only 10 ft per level?
6) I've read a quote from a developer saying that special abilities can be similar (and actually works the same way) or completely different. So is it intentional that the Ancestor Oracle ancestral weapon lasts only 1 minute per level while the Metal and Wood oracle can use it more times?
7) If you are immune to polymorph spells are you immune to your beneficial polymorph spells? Wood oracles with Tree Form won't like to reach level 20...
Thanks in advance
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So here they go and sorry if they are mixed and not related:
I'll field a few of these, but not all of them:
1) So ranged attacks underwater have a -2 penalty to hit for every 5 feet square they have to pass, do that penalty apply to rays?
Well, here's the relevant rules text:
Thrown weapons are ineffective underwater, even when launched from land. Attacks with other ranged weapons take a –2 penalty on attack rolls for every 5 feet of water they pass through, in addition to the normal penalties for range.
Although rays function very similarly to weapons (and can even benefit from Weapon Focus), they are not weapons exactly. So no, you don't take this penalty with rays or other ranged touch spells.
2) Bludeoning and slashing attacks deal half their damage underwater, is this intended to apply also to natural attacks? Does this mean that a squid or a kraken are dealing only half their damage with their tentacles?
I can't find anything specifying what types of attacks are subject to the reduction in damage you're referring to, so we have to assume it includes natural attacks.
3) Assuming that you are fighting with a morning star do you do half or all the damage while attacking underwater?
Its damage is both piercing and bludgeoning, and is therefore bludgeoning. Thus, anything affecting bludgeoning damage will affect it.
4) So alchemists' bombs are thrown splash weapons and they hit touch AC, does this means that Deadly Aim feat does not apply?
Bombs use the "throw splash weapon" rules, which are a ranged touch attack, which is prohibited with Deadly Aim.
That's it for me, as I've got to get back to work. :)
1) I think I am confused. Weapon focus feat applies to weapons and is appliable to rays, doesn't this imply that rays are weapons? Also here's a FAQ about rays (scroll down a bit).
2) There's the table for reference. It speaks about land-based creatures and characters, so does this mean that land-based creatures are doomed to not use any slashing or bludgeoning weapon underwater barring freedom and freedom of movement?
As a side note, I read that many people sub survived a whale's tail slap because, even if the tail weighs a ton, the strike could not land effectively thanks to water environment.
3) Ugh, I was on the wave of asking and I mindlessly wrote too much. Thanks.
4) That make sense and that's what I thought until I read Ogre guide to alchemist -sorry to mention- where there was an indirect reference to Deadly Aim feat...
6) Ok, so no love for Ancestral weapon :P
5) and 7) will wait.
As for now, thank you for responding. If others have an answer, write it! Or, please, hit FAQ button.
Forget about number one, I got trapped in the 'X count as Y for Z'. Environment is not an effect, game speaking.
|
1) I think I am confused. Weapon focus feat applies to weapons and is appliable to rays, doesn't this imply that rays are weapons? Also here's a FAQ about rays (scroll down a bit).
2) There's the table for reference. It speaks about land-based creatures and characters, so does this mean that land-based creatures are doomed to not use any slashing or bludgeoning weapon underwater barring freedom and freedom of movement?
As a side note, I read that many people sub survived a whale's tail slap because, even if the tail weighs a ton, the strike could not land effectively thanks to water environment.3) Ugh, I was on the wave of asking and I mindlessly wrote too much. Thanks.
1) That's a bit sticky. I would allow rays to work separately from normal ranged attacks, if only because they are a limited resource (I know ammunition is as well, but not quite as limited).
2) That's correct, you would need spells like Freedom of Movement or items that mimic that spell to make it work. Here's a relevant quote from the spell: "The spell also allows the subject to move and attack normally while underwater, even with slashing weapons such as axes and swords or with bludgeoning weapons such as flails, hammers, and maces, provided that the weapon is wielded in the hand rather than hurled."
3) I'm going to have to disagree with Jiggy here.
Its damage is both piercing and bludgeoning, and is therefore bludgeoning. Thus, anything affecting bludgeoning damage will affect it.
I would think that it works like DR on monsters. That is to say, if you don't have both types you can't overcome the DR (or in this case do damage). Here's a relevant quote from the Beastiary: "A few other creatures require combinations of different types of attacks to overcome their damage reduction, and a weapon must be both types to overcome this type of damage reduction. A weapon that is only one type is still subject to damage reduction."
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
3) I'm going to have to disagree with Jiggy here.
Its damage is both piercing and bludgeoning, and is therefore bludgeoning. Thus, anything affecting bludgeoning damage will affect it.I would think that it works like DR on monsters. That is to say, if you don't have both types you can't overcome the DR (or in this case do damage). Here's a relevant quote from the Beastiary: "A few other creatures require combinations of different types of attacks to overcome their damage reduction, and a weapon must...
Actually, you're drawing your parallel backwards, likely because they both decrease damage.
They're both mechanics to reduce damage, but they do so in opposite ways.
They both say "X happens, unless you use a certain damage type, in which case Y happens instead".
For DR, X is "damage is reduced" and Y is "damage is unaffected".
But for underwater combat, it's the opposite: X is "damage is unaffected" while Y is "damage is reduced".
So in a way you have the overall idea right, but the similarity of their effects hid the reversal from you. :)
|
|
3) I'm going to have to disagree with Jiggy here.
Its damage is both piercing and bludgeoning, and is therefore bludgeoning. Thus, anything affecting bludgeoning damage will affect it.I would think that it works like DR on monsters. That is to say, if you don't have both types you can't overcome the DR (or in this case do damage). Here's a relevant quote from the Beastiary: "A few other creatures require combinations of different types of attacks to overcome their damage reduction, and a weapon must...Actually, you're drawing your parallel backwards, likely because they both decrease damage.
They're both mechanics to reduce damage, but they do so in opposite ways.
They both say "X happens, unless you use a certain damage type, in which case Y happens instead".
For DR, X is "damage is reduced" and Y is "damage is unaffected".
But for underwater combat, it's the opposite: X is "damage is unaffected" while Y is "damage is reduced".
So in a way you have the overall idea right, but the similarity of their effects hid the reversal from you. :)
Not to sound combative, because I'm really just curious; do you have a reference to the rules to back it up or is this just your interpretation? :)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Not to sound combative, because I'm really just curious; do you have a reference to the rules to back it up or is this just your interpretation? :)
The Core rules Glossary contains the rules for overcoming DR, which explain how the listed quality lets you bypass the DR, while anything lacking that quality will have its damage reduced. Thus, the default is "damage is reduced", and using the right type of attack bypasses that default.
Meanwhile, in the Environment chapter (or section; I'm not sure, as I'm looking at the Official PRD rather than a print book) gives a table...
You know what? There's no text about damage types except in the table... Which means that a morningstar applies to both columns, so if you have a swim speed/make a successful swim check/have firm footing, then you qualify for both half and normal damage.
Hm, looks like I spoke too soon earlier. There's nothing except the table, and the morningstar qualifies for two columns at the same time. Guess that leaves it up to the GM, then.
Personally, I'd use the effects from the bludgeoning column (I think that makes the most sense for the morningstar), but YMMV.
Thanks for getting me to take a second look, Roac. :)
|
|
Not to sound combative, because I'm really just curious; do you have a reference to the rules to back it up or is this just your interpretation? :)The Core rules Glossary contains the rules for overcoming DR, which explain how the listed quality lets you bypass the DR, while anything lacking that quality will have its damage reduced. Thus, the default is "damage is reduced", and using the right type of attack bypasses that default.
Meanwhile, in the Environment chapter (or section; I'm not sure, as I'm looking at the Official PRD rather than a print book) gives a table...
You know what? There's no text about damage types except in the table... Which means that a morningstar applies to both columns, so if you have a swim speed/make a successful swim check/have firm footing, then you qualify for both half and normal damage.
Hm, looks like I spoke too soon earlier. There's nothing except the table, and the morningstar qualifies for two columns at the same time. Guess that leaves it up to the GM, then.
Personally, I'd use the effects from the bludgeoning column (I think that makes the most sense for the morningstar), but YMMV.
Thanks for getting me to take a second look, Roac. :)
No prob. :)
But I do think I agree with the reasoning as it makes more sense for the head of the morning star (specifically the bludgeoning part) to slow the "swing", or the weapon's movement so that damage is decreased.
I think for the budgeoning slashing piercing thing you need to extrapolate logic here.
The majority of bludgeoning and slashing weapons in the game either have to be swung in an arc to use them or in the case of swords have flat blades making them difficult to adjust side to side. Where as most piercing weapons are thrust.
Anyhow i think thats the intent of the rule
I found this quote from Jonathan Tweet in regard of underwater combat in 3.5.
If you don't have a swimming speed (or a freedom of movement effect), you suffer a -2 penalty to attacks and damage when underwater. Any slashing weapon, blunt weapon, claw attack, or tail attack also inflicts half damage. (Subtract the 2 points first, then take half of the rest and round down.)
Remember that a successful hit still inflicts at least 1 point of damage.
Even if you have a swimming speed, you inflict half damage with slashing or blunt weapons (but not claws) unless you have a freedom of movement effect.
Also here and there on page 5 seems that attacking with natural attacks doesn't get around underwater combat hindrances...
More confusion...Hit the FAQ if you do think it's needed!
So having the aquatic subtype is the way to save a character from these restrictions? Seems reasonable.
Answers so far:
1) rays are not weapons so no penalty underwater.
2) aquatic (subtype) creatures are not affected by penalties for underwater combat (no RAW supporting).
3) weapons that deals both type of damage can either deal full or half the damage, take or not the penalty for attacking underwater, subject to GM fiat (no real RAW, table lacks specifics on this).
4) no deadly aim for bombs.
6) Wood and Metal are intended to be superior to weapon at-fly-summoning/creation than Ancestor.
5) and 7) still wait, here they are for quick and easy reference:
A. You use a source of fire that is between 10 feet per oracle level and you can see with your normal sight
or
B. You can use a source of fire that is in the spell's range (400 ft + 40 ft per level) and your sight through it is only 10 ft per level?
7) If you are immune to polymorph spells are you immune to your beneficial polymorph spells? Wood oracles with Tree Form won't like to reach level 20...
Any thought?
Last Bump. Or I'll let this thread die.
1) I personally disagree with rays not being subject to the underwater penalties but thats just me.
2) I believe aquatic subtype creatures ARE affected by the penalties for underwater combat since there is no RAW to state otherwise. Plus, it simply makes sense to me from a physics standpoint. With that said, I could someday see certain creatures bypassing this penalty.
3) My take is that manufactured weapons that have an OR should be able to do whatever is most favorable. Manufactured weapons that have an AND should be affected by what is least favorable.
For creatures the main issues are bite and claw attacks. I can see Bite ignoring the half damage penalty but claws are a questionmark in my mind. However, since both bite and claw do all 3 types at once an argument can be made for the AND statement I made in my last paragraph.
5) I believe that B is correct. The rationale:
If 5A were to be used it would work like this: You are using a fire within 10feet per level as a 'crystal ball' in order to use clairvoyance. However, clairvoyance does not require this so while this could make sense it is a change.
If 5B were to be bused it would work like this: You are using clairvoyance normally and the sensor is any active fire on the other end. You can see around that fire 10feet per level. This to me makes alot more sense than 5A and is closer to how clairvoyance works.
7) By RAW at level 20 the Wood Oracle would become immune to her own polymorph effects. Bestiary p301 immunity does not offer any ways to bypass or drop immunities.
However, I would houserule that the Wood Oracle could still do so if he/she desired.
- Gauss
Sanakht Inaros, the table says nothing about "land-based creatures" and in fact does say something about creatures with a swim speed (namely that creatures with a swim speed use the line that halves thier damage for B/S type damage).
The fluff in the first line of Underwater combat is the only place that states "land-based creatures". The second line says "a creature's attack rolls, damage, and movement." Not: a 'land-based creature's...'
So if we take your interpretation the second line is to be ignored.
- Gauss
First, Pharasma grants the Death Domain in Core rulebook. A domain where the 3rd level domain spell is Animate Dead. (Yes, priests of Pharasma are banned from creating undead thus the 3rd level domain spell is basically empty.)
Second, An oracle of Pharasma would not use Raise the Dead, Undead Servitude, or use the Animate Dead capstone power. All the rest seem to be fair game.
Note: Resist Life would be fine, it is not much different than the 8th level Death Domain power.
I would tell your player that yes, he can take the power but if he ever uses it he will require an atonement or lose his powers. If he objects show him Gods and Magic p30. Alternately, show him the taboos in Faiths of Balance. At that point I would allow him to replace it. Alternately, he can change gods.
- Gauss
Nope, not a mistake. Pharasma is a god of death, just anti-undead. It makes being a worshipper of Pharasma an interesting dichotomy.
Blackbloodtroll, a separatist cleric of Pharasma that created undead would still be violating the principle taboo of Pharasma. That would result in Pharasma cutting off the cleric in question. Nothing in the separatist description would lead me to believe that can be circumvented.
- Gauss
Cojonuda, page 32 of Ultimate Magic has the archetype Separatist.
Short version: you lose the god's favored weapon proficiency. Learn 1 domain from your god and any other domain that is not on your god's list but that your god is not opposed to. That other domain is effectively -2level and -2ability score for any powers.
- Gauss
Blackbloodtroll is correct. Neither Clerics nor Oracles need to worship a god. No divine caster does.
- Gauss
When a cleric chooses not to worship a god they must come up with a concept to worship.
such as battle, death, justice, or knowledge—free of a deific abstraction. (Work with your GM if you prefer this path to selecting a specific deity.)
- Gauss
No, it would not apply to oracles.
- Gauss
The taboo is for worshipping that particular god. If you do not like that particular god's taboo find a different god or an ideal that you are comfortable worshipping.
- Gauss
No, the taboo belongs to that particular god. All worshippers have that taboo. However, not all worshippers have the same penalty for violating it. Clerics in particular will lose powers and abilities for violating it and will require an Atonement spell. A wizard of Pharasma will 'feel bad' but not require an atonement.
IE: The wizard may lose social standing with other worshipers of Pharasma. The cleric will lose being a cleric.
- Gauss
To summarize all of this:
Oracle with Bones Mystery worshipping Pharasma. To be a proper Pharasma worshiper the oracle should not raise dead as per the taboo.
Violations of this are up to GM fiat (removal of divinely originated powers could be in order but there is no specific penalties as per RAW).
To keep with your player's character concept I would suggest he NOT worship Pharasma, find an ideal or a different god that has no problem with undead critters.
End of summary.
- Gauss