Ghost Touch weapons aren't of great use to incorporeal creatures because the weapon itself isn't incorporeal, and can't pass through barriers like its wielder can.
^this.
Ghost touch items are actually not so great for incorporeal creatures. Welding them prevents them from passing through objects.
Gloves of Storing, Rings and Force Shield get around those restrictions nicely though. They just has to be crafted not he ethereal plane or brought with the creature into the ethereal plane or something like that.
I'm not if finding if this is specifically addressed yet and just want to make sure I'm reading it correctly
Incorporeals inside of an object (most often a wall or floor) have total cover but can only sense adjacent squares (targets have total concealment).
If they attack an adjacent square, they suffer the 50% miss chance, but are reduced to having normal cover vs readied actions only.
1)Since Stealth may be used while you have cover, is it legal for an incorporeal to attempt to attack from stealth (opposed by the Perception of everyone who can see the attack) to also deny dex on top of already targeting touch? Would a successful Stealth check deny readied attacks? (a single party member yelling a warning out of turn should effectively shut this tactic down)
2)If it has Flyby Attack (or Spring Attack with a Ghost Touch weapon), is stealth broken merely by exiting the wall? (My reading is that their touches are always(?) supernatural abilities requiring a standard action and not able to be substituted for an attack.)
3)If it has Greater Blindfight and Shadow Strike (say a Ghost Rog5/Asn10), would it qualify for Sneak Attack while attacking from inside the wall? (Death Attack still requires an actual melee weapon attack)
4)Conductive (+Ghost Touch) weapons seem rather powerful for ghosts/incorporeals? Does anyone think this addition deserves a CR bump? I gather they still target normal AC?
1. Perception checks are reactive with regard to this situation. As for the readied action it depends on how its worded. If he words it to attack the incorporeal creature then as soon as the creature attacks it breaks stealth so the readied action goes off.
2. Stealth is broken upon the attack so it will still get hit when trying to go back inside the wall.
3. Greater Blind-fight does not completely remove concealment so SA should not work.
4. The others have handled this.
An incorporeal in the wall can use Stealth (it has total cover). When it attacks, it's first attack will automatically deny DEX (assuming the in-wall stealth check was successful). But now it will lose Stealth after that first attack.
If the opponent has total concealment (which it normally would if the incorporeal is attacking from inside the wall), then the incorporeal cannot use Sneak Attack (you cannot use SA against creatures with any concealment).
3)If it has Greater Blindfight and Shadow Strike (say a Ghost Rog5/Asn10), would it qualify for Sneak Attack while attacking from inside the wall? (Death Attack still requires an actual melee weapon attack)
This should work. Sneak attack away!
Would a successful Stealth check deny readied attacks? (a single party member yelling a warning out of turn should effectively shut this tactic down)
That's a good question and the answer has lots of moving parts...
The Stealth rule says that if you are already stealthed, you can attack from stealth and your stealth doesn't break until after your first attack, so for that first attack, the target loses his DEX bonus to AC. Easy enough.
The Ready Action rule says that you go before the action that triggers your readied action and you can interrupt the combatant whose action triggered you. Easy enough.
Putting those together, however, is a bit difficult.
The fighter readies an action to attack any ghostly appendage that reaches out of the wall to hit him. Then it's the ghost's turn and it reaches out of the wall to hit the fighter. The fighter was ready for that so he attacks, interrupting the ghost's attack. He swings (one standard action) and if he kills the ghost, that's the end of it. If not, the ghost gets to continue its turn and attack the fighter who, interestingly enough, still loses his DEX bonus to AC for that first attack.
As awkward as that last bit seems to be, I think that's the RAW. There is nothing in the Ready Action that says a readied action can be used to screw up Stealth, and there is nothing in the Stealth rules that say that readied actions screw them up. There is also nothing I can find that says you cannot ready for an attack you cannot see (frankly, I expected a rule like this but it's not there) and, on the other hand, if the fighter is looking right at the wall, expecting the ghost to attack, when it does, there is no reason for him to be unable to see it.
The only way I can parse this is that, even though the fighter expected the ghost's attack, it catches him by just enough surprise that he loses his DEX bonus to AC, but not enough surprise that he loses his readied action which still goes first.
Weird, and I bet many GMs would make house rules for this, but that seems to be how it should work. I think.
Another thing to remember is that even a large incorporeal creature or one with reach such as a ghost touch longspear is subject to the readied attack. The rules specifically say the creature must stay adjacent to the object's exterior and the rules also say that the creature only has cover while attacking. They don't say if the creature is large or has reach that it gets an exception.
1)Since Stealth may be used while you have cover, is it legal for an incorporeal to attempt to attack from stealth (opposed by the Perception of everyone who can see the attack) to also deny dex on top of already targeting touch? Would a successful Stealth check deny readied attacks? (a single party member yelling a warning out of turn should effectively shut this tactic down)
How i think that would work is
Adventurers stand ready for ghosts.
Ghost attempts to sneakily attack
Those that beat the stealth with perception go before the ghost and...
Good news, the ghost can attack and deny the dex if it beat the stealth roll but..
Bad news for the ghost, that attack just broke stealth. The other readied actions go off.
I'm pretty sure that's not how stealthy attacking works in the first place.
You make your stealth check BEFORE the round in which you attack. The rule specifically says "When you start your turn using Stealth..."
So, in round x, the ghost is FULLY in the wall. Total concealment, total cover. He makes a Stealth check against all the Perception checks of everyone*. Then in round x+1 he lunges out and makes one attack, having the benefit of Stealth until after that attack resolves - no Stealth rolls needed since he had the Stealth from the previous round. Now everyone just automatically sees the ghost, with no Perception checks needed.
*I don't even think the ghost can fail. Incorporeal cannot be heard, and while he's in the wall, there is no LOS to him so he cannot be seen. No sight, no sound - not many senses left to even attempt a Perception check. Does the ghost get +20 for being invisible in the wall? By RAW, probably not, but it seems like he should. I think the Stealth check is an auto-success while he's fully in the wall.
You need to be specific about what you disagree with me about.
I never said you could strike a creature with total cover. The rules state that the creature only has cover(which grants a bonus to AC, and is not the same as total cover) when it attacks. When it is not attacking it has total cover(which prevents it from being targeted anyway).
An incorporeal creature inside an object has total cover, but when it attacks a creature outside the object it only has cover, so a creature outside with a readied action could strike at it as it attacks. An incorporeal creature cannot pass through a force effect.
If you thought I was saying you could attack it while it was completely covered then you misread my intentions.
edit: I also agree that you can not strike something outside of your reach, and I never suggested otherwise.
You still misunderstand, it moves from total cover (cannot be attacked) to cover (can be attacked), this does not change the targeting rules, or let you somehow target its limbs/weapons.
The entry implies this change is very brief, and indicates that therefore the only way to attack before it returns to total cover is a readied action.
I know this already. I never said it could be done outside of a readied action. I even bolded that in my last quote, and once again I am NOT saying limbs can be targeted. Why do you keep saying that when I already said it can not be done.
It is like I am saying 1+1 is not 3, and you want to tell me again that it is not 3 despite me already saying it.
So to make sure you understand me I NEVER said limbs could be targeted, and I never said you can target a creature that has total cover, and I understand you need to ready an action.
Are we clear now?
Okay, reevaluating the comments, it appears I inferred something you possibly did not intend?
The issue I'm bringing up is specifically related to melee attacks.
W (wall with Large+ incorporeal)
X (empty)
F (melee fighter)If the fighter only has 5ft reach, he cannot ready a melee attack vs the incorporeal because it occupies a square outside of his reach.
He could however ready a ranged attack, or an attack with a reach weapon.
I agree he can not reach the wall/enemy if he does not move, but readied actions allow a 5 foot step so he could 5 foot step and then take the attack.
You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round.
Could a ghost weilding a brilliant energy ghost touch weapon attack from cover?
|
Would a successful Stealth check deny readied attacks? (a single party member yelling a warning out of turn should effectively shut this tactic down)That's a good question and the answer has lots of moving parts...
The Stealth rule says that if you are already stealthed, you can attack from stealth and your stealth doesn't break until after your first attack, so for that first attack, the target loses his DEX bonus to AC. Easy enough.
The Ready Action rule says that you go before the action that triggers your readied action and you can interrupt the combatant whose action triggered you. Easy enough.
Putting those together, however, is a bit difficult.
The fighter readies an action to attack any ghostly appendage that reaches out of the wall to hit him. Then it's the ghost's turn and it reaches out of the wall to hit the fighter. The fighter was ready for that so he attacks, interrupting the ghost's attack. He swings (one standard action) and if he kills the ghost, that's the end of it. If not, the ghost gets to continue its turn and attack the fighter who, interestingly enough, still loses his DEX bonus to AC for that first attack.
As awkward as that last bit seems to be, I think that's the RAW. There is nothing in the Ready Action that says a readied action can be used to screw up Stealth, and there is nothing in the Stealth rules that say that readied actions screw them up. There is also nothing I can find that says you cannot ready for an attack you cannot see (frankly, I expected a rule like this but it's not there) and, on the other hand, if the fighter is looking right at the wall, expecting the ghost to attack, when it does, there is no reason for him to be unable to see it.
To answer: Would a successful Stealth check deny readied attacks?
Yes
I was going to quote stealth, breaking stealth, and concealment rules for this question but it really boils down to common sense and the readied action:
Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it.
The latter part "and the conditions under which you will take it" is the relevant part. If a GM doesn't automatically interpret you saying "when X happens" as "when my character notices X happening", or make you rephrase it as such, then that is just bad GMing.
To answer: If it has Greater Blindfight and Shadow Strike (say a Ghost Rog5/Asn10), would it qualify for Sneak Attack while attacking from inside the wall? (Death Attack still requires an actual melee weapon attack)
Yes... that is nasty.. but CR17 opponents are kinda supposed to be nasty, aren't they? Just remember it has to be an attack that does Hit Point Damager to in order to add the sneak damage to it..
Could a ghost weilding a brilliant energy ghost touch weapon attack from cover?
If you mean total cover then no. The rules say he has to come out. That is the reason why. Otherwise he could use reach and stay behind the wall.
|
|
To answer: Would a successful Stealth check deny readied attacks?Yes
I was going to quote stealth, breaking stealth, and concealment rules for this question but it really boils down to common sense and the readied action:
Actually I should have stated that a readied action by a character will not interrupt the attack from stealth since stealth only drops after the attack, (hit or miss) But if the attacker appearing from stealth satisfies the ready action's tigger then it would go off immediately there after.
An incorporeal in the wall can use Stealth (it has total cover). When it attacks, it's first attack will automatically deny DEX (assuming the in-wall stealth check was successful). But now it will lose Stealth after that first attack.
If the opponent has total concealment (which it normally would if the incorporeal is attacking from inside the wall), then the incorporeal cannot use Sneak Attack (you cannot use SA against creatures with any concealment).
3)If it has Greater Blindfight and Shadow Strike (say a Ghost Rog5/Asn10), would it qualify for Sneak Attack while attacking from inside the wall? (Death Attack still requires an actual melee weapon attack)This should work. Sneak attack away!
You might get table variation on this combo.
Greater Blind Fight says "you treat opponents with total concealment as if they had normal concealment".
Shadow Strike says "You can deal precision damage, such as sneak attack damage, against targets with concealment (but not total concealment)."
Technically, Greater Blind Fight doesn't change the target's concealment (just how it affects you), so I could see a GM ruling that Shadow Strike does not apply. I personally would rule that Shadow Strike applies, but the rules interaction is not 100% clear. Check with your GM before you rely on that combination.
Actually I should have stated that a readied action by a character will not interrupt the attack from stealth since stealth only drops after the attack, (hit or miss) But if the attacker appearing from stealth satisfies the ready action's tigger then it would go off immediately there after.
To answer: Would a successful Stealth check deny readied attacks?Yes
I was going to quote stealth, breaking stealth, and concealment rules for this question but it really boils down to common sense and the readied action:
The wording matters. I would just say I attack as soon as I see it, which would be right after his stealth dropped.
Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it.
The latter part "and the conditions under which you will take it" is the relevant part. If a GM doesn't automatically interpret you saying "when X happens" as "when my character notices X happening", or make you rephrase it as such, then that is just bad GMing.
I'm not sure you're aware of which section of the rules this is in.
This is not the "GM Interpretation" forum and it's not the "Pretend It Says Whatever You Want" forum; it's the "Rules Questions" forum. Calling someone a bad GM because they read the rules and follow them is a little harsh, don't you think?
Your suggestion to interpret wording that does not exist might be a good one, and I completely understand where you're coming from, but you simply cannot, in a "Rules Questions" forum, accuse people of bad GMing when all they want to do is understand the rules.
So make your house rule. In my post that you quoted I predicted that you would, and that you wouldn't be alone in doing so. But be careful with the "bad GM" labels when YOU"RE the one talking house rules in a "Rules Questions" forum.
|
|
Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it.
The latter part "and the conditions under which you will take it" is the relevant part. If a GM doesn't automatically interpret you saying "when X happens" as "when my character notices X happening", or make you rephrase it as such, then that is just bad GMing.
I'm not sure you're aware of which section of the rules this is in.
This is not the "GM Interpretation" forum and it's not the "Pretend It Says Whatever You Want" forum; it's the "Rules Questions" forum. Calling someone a bad GM because they read the rules and follow them is a little harsh, don't you think?
Your suggestion to interpret wording that does not exist might be a good one, and I completely understand where you're coming from, but you simply cannot, in a "Rules Questions" forum, accuse people of bad GMing when all they want to do is understand the rules.
So make your house rule. In my post that you quoted I predicted that you would, and that you wouldn't be alone in doing so. But be careful with the "bad GM" labels when YOU"RE the one talking house rules in a "Rules Questions" forum.
In the spirit of not starting a forum flame war, can you please link to rules to define "The Conditions under which you will take it" ?
In the spirit of not starting a forum flame war, can you please link to rules to define "The Conditions under which you will take it" ?Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it.
The latter part "and the conditions under which you will take it" is the relevant part. If a GM doesn't automatically interpret you saying "when X happens" as "when my character notices X happening", or make you rephrase it as such, then that is just bad GMing.
I'm not sure you're aware of which section of the rules this is in.
This is not the "GM Interpretation" forum and it's not the "Pretend It Says Whatever You Want" forum; it's the "Rules Questions" forum. Calling someone a bad GM because they read the rules and follow them is a little harsh, don't you think?
Your suggestion to interpret wording that does not exist might be a good one, and I completely understand where you're coming from, but you simply cannot, in a "Rules Questions" forum, accuse people of bad GMing when all they want to do is understand the rules.
So make your house rule. In my post that you quoted I predicted that you would, and that you wouldn't be alone in doing so. But be careful with the "bad GM" labels when YOU"RE the one talking house rules in a "Rules Questions" forum.
I think he is talking about the part where you are saying "If a GM doesn't automatically interpret you saying "when X happens" as "when my character notices X happening", or make you rephrase it as such, then that is just bad GMing."
Because if one says "when he attacks me" it means "When he attacks me" and you are saying that a GM should switch what you are saying to "When I see him attack me" or ask you to rephrase the readied, but doesn't is bad GMing. The issue with that is the readied action condition is stated "When he attacks me" and you are saying that the GM should just change that or ask you to change that, and if he doesn't it's bad GMing. When the condition is being said. "When he attacks me" which is a condition to take the readied action.
To be quite honest the GM doing whatever he wants is within the confines of the game because the game allows the GM to do whatever he wants, viewed as correct etiquette or not. Now a Good GM will say, "Well this is happening because that's what I want to happen." in a calm, nice voice, and with a gentle smile. A Bad GM will say, "This is happening because I want it to. MWUUUAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" while twirling his handle bar mustache (imaginary or not,)and then you and the rest of the players have to find a way to vanquish the evil GM where he stands.
;{D>
|
I addressed this before. A Dread Wraith should have no issue pinpointing living creatures in the range of its lifesense (they would still benefit from concealment however). But yes, it is a wrinkle if the ghost doesn't have such specials.I'm not sure that lifesense would help it in this situation.
Lifesense (Su) The creature notices and locates living creatures within 60 feet, just as if it possessed the blindsight ability.Blindsight (Ex) This ability is similar to blindsense, but is far more discerning. Using nonvisual senses, such as sensitivity to vibrations, keen smell, acute hearing, or echolocation, a creature with blindsight maneuvers and fights as well as a sighted creature. Invisibility, darkness, and most kinds of concealment are irrelevant, though the creature must have line of effect to a creature or object to discern that creature or object. The ability's range is specified in the creature's descriptive text. The creature usually does not need to make Perception checks to notice creatures within range of its blindsight ability. Unless noted otherwise, blindsight is continuous, and the creature need do nothing to use it. Some forms of blindsight, however, must be triggered as a free action. If so, this is noted in the creature's description. If a creature must trigger its blindsight ability, the creature gains the benefits of blindsight only during its turn.Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.Bolding mine.
I could be wrong but I think being in the wall blocks line of effect even for incorporeal creatures.
Lifesense don't help at all against a ghost. It is not a living creature.
Lifesense don't help at all against a ghost. It is not a living creature.I addressed this before. A Dread Wraith should have no issue pinpointing living creatures in the range of its lifesense (they would still benefit from concealment however). But yes, it is a wrinkle if the ghost doesn't have such specials.I'm not sure that lifesense would help it in this situation.
Lifesense (Su) The creature notices and locates living creatures within 60 feet, just as if it possessed the blindsight ability.Blindsight (Ex) This ability is similar to blindsense, but is far more discerning. Using nonvisual senses, such as sensitivity to vibrations, keen smell, acute hearing, or echolocation, a creature with blindsight maneuvers and fights as well as a sighted creature. Invisibility, darkness, and most kinds of concealment are irrelevant, though the creature must have line of effect to a creature or object to discern that creature or object. The ability's range is specified in the creature's descriptive text. The creature usually does not need to make Perception checks to notice creatures within range of its blindsight ability. Unless noted otherwise, blindsight is continuous, and the creature need do nothing to use it. Some forms of blindsight, however, must be triggered as a free action. If so, this is noted in the creature's description. If a creature must trigger its blindsight ability, the creature gains the benefits of blindsight only during its turn.Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.Bolding mine.
I could be wrong but I think being in the wall blocks line of effect even for incorporeal creatures.
I thought they have been talking about the "ghost" having lifesense to know where the player's character was when it attacked from a wall/floor?
You make a very good case, and you may be correct concerning RAI, but the barrier is not solid to an incorporeal unless it is made of force (or ghost touch), so this seems like a GM call as worst case for the ghost. (This is supported by the ghost gaining total cover inside the wall, while his opponents merely have total concealment from him.)
Whether something is solid or not is not subjective. It is objective. Going by your argument a ghost sorcerer could throw fireballs through a wall just because he can walk through it, but I really don't see that happening. However if we take the stance that solid is solid, but incorporeal creatures just bypass it then lifesense should be blocked.
Sorry for the resurrection, but I had a thought. What if an Amulet of Mighty Fists with the heartseeking enhancement was involved?