| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I had a player death at my PFS table this weekend, when an evil cleric channeled negative energy. However he was prone at the time, and some of my players believe that he can't properly present his (un)holy symbol from the ground, especially since the killed player was on a lower level. Is there any rules citation anywhere that specifies how a cleric can "present" their symbol?
Honestly, it depends on what the Symbol is.
For some clerics, the Symbol is a weapon or item they carry, which can be disarmed; when this happens, the cleric cannot use it to channel energy (unless they have a spare).
Another thing to remember is that in order for the channel to work, the effect must be able to affect the character; if he is behind a wall or on a walled slope and is prone/crouching, or even a ceiling (since you said he's on a level lower than the target), he wouldn't be able to be affected by the channel energy, and thusly, no damage would be dealt to him by the channel.
The thing about Channel Energy is that it is very vague in how it can be interpreted. All it says is that "The target must be able to see the Holy Symbol" and that the Channel Energy feature is a Burst Effect (meaning it doesn't go around walls and such like a Spread Effect does). This can be interpreted to meaning that some stupid undead ghost with a black ethereal cloak can wrap some of it over his eyes, and avoid the Channel Energy altogether; with that said, it is really silly that it is so poorly worded, so it's up to GM FIAT.
I wouldn't know how to rule it from my understanding, since I have no clue what all happened or how the map looks and the conditions that are set, but there are some specifics and major GM FIAT that must be taken into consideration, and if you mean "lower level" as in he's on a completely separate dungeon level (AKA, down a flight of stairs), then he wouldn't have been affected by it.
Yes and no; yes, the Cleric does need to plainly (and broadly) show the Holy Symbol. No, because holding the symbol plainly or broadly isn't what creates the power; it's how the Cleric channels the power of the Holy Symbol. If the target was grappled and/or pinned, stunned, dazed, etc. or the Symbol was disarmed, then he can't use it, and he most certainly can't channel it. If he's prone, he can try to hold it up, and the divine effects would still radiate.
Whether the Cleric holds the symbol up broadly or not does not demonstrate what the effect is; it only demonstrates how he can channel the power of the Holy Symbol, and that is easily combatted through the other conditions and combat maneuvers performed on the target, not being on the ground.
Don't forget that the player that was killed was also unconcious and prone and on a lower level. If he was unconcious he could not see the symbol correct? Oh so everyone knows I was in this game and it was my son's character that was killed thats how I know he was unconcious too.
It's gray area. I gave a most comical example with my black cloak ghost.
If the Cleric channels energy, and the Black Cloak Ghost covers his eyes with his cloak, should he not even get affected due to the RAW wording (which is p*** poor, by the way)? Yes. Because some flimsy ethereal cloak doesn't stop the powers from affecting you.
The same concept applies to your example; he isn't affected because of some silly garment or because he's unconscious, he's not affected because the channeling doesn't bypass thick stone floors.
RAW, you can say that no, he wouldn't be affected. RAW, you can say that as a free action you can use a cloak or cover your eyes with your arm/hands and not be affected by the Channel effect. But if we allowed that, it would be absolutely silly and ridiculous (and quite frankly, severely underpowered and a complete joke) as a Cleric's only class feature (besides Spellcasting).
Wow, good question. There is no clear mechanic for this so yeah... I do understand the confusion. The silver holy symbol weighs 1 lb. so I'm guessing that it is a stand-alone item. "A cleric must be able to present her holy symbol to use this ability" probably means that she must hold up/out a holy symbol of her deity with conviction.
CRB, pg. 161:
"A holy symbol focuses positive energy and is used by good clerics and paladins (or by neutral clerics who want to cast good spells or channel positive energy). Each religion has its own holy symbol."
To be honest, it doesn't really say what the holy symbol is or if you can say you have it on your armor, on a necklace, at your waist, etc. This is a murky section that most players should hammer out with their GM's before the game. Answering this question beforehand allows you in turn to better answer the original question.
I always assumed that you had to be able to hold it in your hand. Really I think any situation that doesn't prevent you from attacking, would allow you to hold the holy symbol and present it strongly. The fact is the person on the ground bellow doesn't need to see it. Heck the cleric can present it strongly in the opposite direction.
pretty much though in short order, if the cleric is capable of gripping a weapon and attacking with it he can probably grip his holy symbol and present it strongly.
@ Mojo: Again, it's a gray area that isn't addressed by RAW, and is left to GM FIAT. We can argue about how a Holy Symbol should and should not be used, and we are all probably right on some (if not all) of our interpretations. At the same time, it all boils down to what it should generally be classified as, which is something we can never truly agree upon until RAW is presented. And until it does, it's back to square 1, leading to GM FIAT to determine what happens.
Could he present it strongly being in grease?
If the Holy Symbol was held in his hand, yes, he would lose grip of it. If the Holy Symbol was attached to his neck (like a brooch or neckguard), it would just fall from his hands, and he probably wouldn't really be able to channel, since he would need another Standard Action to attempt it again. You could do a Combat Maneuver and Disarm (or even Sunder) the Holy Symbol, making them unable to even use Channel Energy.
But, if he channeled in the round previous from when you casted Grease, it would not have affected the outcome.
Again, it's all up to GM FIAT, and I can tell you that if the character was down a flight of stairs and the Cleric was in the room (not even on the staircase), then it's a bunch of bull, and the character would still be alive.
Don't forget that the player that was killed was also unconcious and prone and on a lower level. If he was unconcious he could not see the symbol correct? Oh so everyone knows I was in this game and it was my son's character that was killed thats how I know he was unconcious too.
Just because someone can't see it that does not mean it was not presented.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone, please note that there is a trait that gives you a birthmark that counts for a holy symbol. I would take that to mean the holy symbol merely has to be on display (as opposed to say, in his backpack under his extra set of tighty whiteys), otherwise the trait is useless, unless you rip your own skin off and hold it aloft. So, if the holy symbol was around his neck, and visibly his, then the channel should work. And it doesn't matter if you see it or not, if you're in the line of effect, you're affected.
Now, if the guy was on another level of the building, and there wasn't line of effect, then he didn't get hit by the channel.
Yes he could present it in grease. Strongly present just means to make it shown. It pretty like how people show crosses to vampire. Actually in the rules a holy symbol that is strongly presented to a vampire will keep it away. You don't have to be able to be standing or have clean holy symbol to keep a vampire away or heal someone with channel energy. So you should not need the same situation to harm someone with channel energy
|
From PRD:
Channeling energy causes a burst that affects all creatures of one type (either undead or living) in a 30-foot radius centered on the cleric.
also from PRD:
A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners).
So:
The Cleric was prone on a platform above the prone PC on the floor below whose square was next to the side wall of said platform.
Therefore:
Would his spell need to go around the corner of the platform in order to hit the PC? Corners can be horizonal as well as vertical, correct?
I would say the unconcious dwarf would indeed have cover. I am new and biased however as I am the nine year old players father. (Not saying the GM is being evil by killing the little boys character , well only to tease said GM).
The idea is that you need line of sight. It does not matter if you can "see" the holy symbol. Otherwise all blind undead would be immune. Or you could just close your eyes. I am pretty sure that is not the design intent.
Pretty much this. We had this argument with a previous campaign with our Cleric using a Channel Energy, and not being able to do it because he was hiding in a cart, and the tapestry blocking them from seeing it.
This is the kind of gray area we talk about, and Pyrrhic pretty much hit it on the head. The wording "They must be able to see it" (albeit ambiguous and not a direct quote, but the general statement made for it) should be translated to "This feature requires that the player must normally have a line of sight to a target in order for the Channel Energy feature to affect them," because the previous wording literally makes no sense.
Now we go back to the character's fate: if the Cleric was prone and the PC was down a flight of stairs (as what you guys seem to tell me, I can't say for sure since I wasn't there), chances are the Cleric (from his current position and square) had no line of sight from the Cleric to the PC (due to the PC being covered by the flight of stairs). The channel would affect anyone on a congruent level of the Cleric (such as you guys towering over him), but not the PC down below.
From PRD:Channeling energy causes a burst that affects all creatures of one type (either undead or living) in a 30-foot radius centered on the cleric.
also from PRD:
A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners).
So:
The Cleric was prone on a platform above the prone PC on the floor below whose square was next to the side wall of said platform.
Therefore:
Would his spell need to go around the corner of the platform in order to hit the PC? Corners can be horizonal as well as vertical, correct?
I would say the unconcious dwarf would indeed have cover. I am new and biased however as I am the nine year old players father. (Not saying the GM is being evil by killing the little boys character , well only to tease said GM).
Just to be clear is the following correct?
c=clericd=dead pc
x=squars
xxxxx
xxcxx
xxxdx
In short if them being on the same level would he have been 5 feet away or farther away*. I ask because these things happen in 3d so even if he was a level below he could have been hit since it is a spherical affect, if he was far enough away.
*I know he was on a different level. I am just trying to create a mental image.
There are no rules for dropping things when you fall. Being prone when you are a cleric does not make you weak either. It is not people like will think "The cleric is prone, and not a threat now." He can still present that symbol strongly in every sense of the word. Before you try to take up for the dead player remember the rules work both ways in this game, and you really don't want to prevent the party cleric from channeling just because he is prone or unable to keep a vampire away because he is prone.
With that said there is no rule support for not being able to present a symbol strongly while prone or any other situation, except for those that don't allow you to take actions or move.
Just to be clear is the following correct?
c=cleric
d=dead pc
x=squarsxxxxx
xxcxx
xxxdxIn short if them being on the same level would he have been 5 feet away or farther away*. I ask because these things happen in 3d so even if he was a level below he could have been hit since it is a spherical affect, if he was far enough away.
*I know he was on a different level. I am just trying to create a mental image.
More like this:
B
xdcx B
xssseeep
xssseeee
xssseeee
xssseeeeWhere:
x= ground
s= stairs leading up to the dais
c= the small colunm at the edge of the Dais
e= the elevated dais
p= the priest that had fallen down.
B= two creatures that were both large. The one closest to the Priest was also prone
I will ask another question since I probably don't have the PFS adventure in question. If both players were standing would they have been able to shoot each other with ranged weapons?
I actually agree that this is correct in a RAW situation. I am more or less arguing that it doesn't wash for me from a "trying to visualize it" stance. I think it is an argument of technical rules versus common sense flavor.
There are no rules for dropping things when you fall. Being prone when you are a cleric does not make you weak either. It is not people like will think "The cleric is prone, and not a threat now." He can still present that symbol strongly in every sense of the word. Before you try to take up for the dead player remember the rules work both ways in this game, and you really don't want to prevent the party cleric from channeling just because he is prone or unable to keep a vampire away because he is prone.
With that said there is no rule support for not being able to present a symbol strongly while prone or any other situation, except for those that don't allow you to take actions or move.
Flavor is not the rules though. Only the mechanics are, and most people I know would say it only has to be manipulated and put on display. The assumption that the cleric is less of a cleric because he is prone is not one I agree with. If the cleric lost power for being prone then I might agree with that flavor-wise, but since he can still summon demons, and do other really bad things to you while prone my view on him would not change at all. If anything him being prone would upset him, and make him more dangerous.
'Present' means to display or show something. No reason he can't do that from prone, he just holds it over his head for all to see.
As to cover from the burst, bear in mind that it's total cover which protects you, not just cover (although cover can give you a reflex save bonus). Total cover means you're entirely behind a wall or the like, not just partially. If the victim was completely blocked from the point of origin by walls/floor/whatever, then he would be safe. But if even part of his body was not in cover, then it provides no defense at all against the channel.
|
|
www.flickr.com/photos/tbaileysr/7990131279/
Go to Picture.
I did this rough drawing to show position. The P is the priest prone on the dais.
The L is the large prone creature on the floor.
The d is the dwarf on the ground prone as well.
I wouldn't think so, mainly because of that column at the corner which would have been in the way. At a bare minimum, it would have been partial cover. With both of them prone, I would think the cover would upgrade to full because of the fact that line of effect would now have to go through both the column and the floor of the Dais itself.I will ask another question since I probably don't have the PFS adventure in question. If both players were standing would they have been able to shoot each other with ranged weapons?
Just to be clear is the following correct?
c=cleric
d=dead pc
x=squarsxxxxx
xxcxx
xxxdxIn short if them being on the same level would he have been 5 feet away or farther away*. I ask because these things happen in 3d so even if he was a level below he could have been hit since it is a spherical affect, if he was far enough away.
*I know he was on a different level. I am just trying to create a mental image.
More like this:
B
xdcx B
xssseeep
xssseeee
xssseeee
xssseeeeWhere:
x= ground
s= stairs leading up to the dais
c= the small colunm at the edge of the Dais
e= the elevated dais
p= the priest that had fallen down.
B= two creatures that were both large. The one closest to the Priest was also prone
I don't have the map so I can only say this. If they could have shot each other then there is no total cover and the result is valid. If they could not have shot each other then total cover is present and the death is not valid. The issue of cover is the only way to get a reversal, if possible at all. I don't have any PFS scenarios past season 2 so I can't give you a "for sure" answer about that.
Even then you would have the issue of the Column that would still have been between them. I think one or the other would give partial cover, both would seem to give total cover, in my eyes that is. Also, considering that shooting while prone is problematic to begin with and being prone allows for a bonus to AC that mimics having partial cover and I would think that that the two would work together to provide full cover.
Given the picture I posted the priest would have had to crawl to the edge of the dais in the grease to shoot at the dwarf with both of them prone I would think.
Being prone has no affect on total cover by the rules. It only affects AC. For Total cover you have to try to draw a line from the edge of one square to the other square. If the line is blocked by a solid of object then you have total cover.
Given the picture I posted the priest would have had to crawl to the edge of the dais in the grease to shoot at the dwarf with both of them prone I would think.
Going prone would not be a factor, but if he would have to walk to the edge due to the dias being more than 5 feet across to shoot someone who is at the edge then it seem like your son had total cover.
Unfortunately, shooting him has nothing to do with channel. Remember, channel is a supernatural effect that radiates out from the cleric in a 30 foot radius. Also, by the rules, you have to use 5ft squares for line of effect, not straight lines. So, if you can draw a line from any corner of the cleric's square (including the top of the square, or cube if you will) to any opposite corner of the target square, then anyone in the square is effected (but they may get a save bonus if the DM determines they have partial cover).
So, for this situation, if you can draw a straight line from either top corner of the cleric's square to either of the bottom farthest corners of the Dwarf's square, then he's in the area of effect for the burst.
Is this 'logical' from a real world standpoint, since it doesn't take position in the square into account? No. But it is the mechanics of the rules as they are laid out. Why? Because the rules are only a rough approximation of the physics of the world they are modeling. They can't completely cover everything.
In a home game, you can give a big bonus to the dwarf, but in PFS, you're limited to working within the rules, including determining line of effct based on squares, not character position.
|
|
Go to picture
This is how I imagine the dais from what we had as a drawing of on the player map.
Now imagine the dwarf is laying unconcious in the road against the wall of the dais.
I don't think the prone priest would have line of site to him from it.
Now this I am going to disagree with you on. Only because the fact that he was prone caused a situation where his line of effect was also having to travel through the floor as well as the straight line that you are talking about. On a level playing field, I agree with what you are saying completely, but him being prone means that his line of effect had to travel through the floor of the dais.
Going prone would not be a factor, but if he would have to walk to the edge due to the dias being more than 5 feet across to shoot someone who is at the edge then it seem like your son had total cover.Given the picture I posted the priest would have had to crawl to the edge of the dais in the grease to shoot at the dwarf with both of them prone I would think.
The book does not care about you being prone is what I am trying to say. If the energy burst can reach your square you then you are affected. If it can't then you are not. The only thing that determines that is the line that can or can not be drawn from square to square.
Total Cover: If you don't have line of effect to your target (that is, you cannot draw any line from your square to your target's square without crossing a solid barrier), he is considered to have total cover from you. You can't make an attack against a target that has total cover.
|
|
Seems to me you would need a scale model of the dais in order to accurately determine line of sight. Thats the way line of sight would be done in most miniture battle games. If you drew a chalk line from the priests square to the square the dwarf was on it would certainly need to pass through the floor of the dais to touch it. In my opinion anyway.
So wraithstrike does the wall of the dais not factor in? Line of sight surely takes in to account vertical as well as horizontal does it not?
If the wall of the Dias would block the imaginary line that is going from one square to the other then it would count as total cover. Line of sight and line of effect are not always the same in PF. You can have one without the other. As an example if I am behind an invisible but solid barrier such as a wall of force you might have line of sight to me, but not line of effect since the wall of force would block your attacks.
The floor could count as a barrier and block line of affect so if the line passed through it then the dwarf would be safe.