Chain Lightning (and similar) - what is going on exactly?


Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

The card say:

"For your combat check, display this card ... While displayed, you may use the result of this check for any combat check you attempt..."

So, I've already displayed this card, and I encounter a new monster. What exactly happens?

- at what step of Attempting the Check do I use the Chain Lightning power?

- given the rule "Choosing to activate a power on a displayed card also counts as playing it." - I assume the counts as if I'm playing a spell on the check?

- I am NOT determining the skill for the check through the Chain Lightning - does that mean I don't add it's traits to the check? (thereby bypassing Attack/Electricity immunities)

- for that matter, I suppose I *must* determine my skill for the check - so am I in fact making a Strength/Melee check (or maybe even something else, if I play a card, and don't fight bare-handed), and therefore triggering any possible effects ("If the check has the Melee trait..."), while my Strength (or whatever) die gets overruled by the CL power

My current reading of the situation, counter-intuitive as it may be, is that, if I fight bare-handed:
- I'm making a Strength/Melee check, without rolling the Strength die, while playing a spell (and bypassing any spell-resistance) in my Modify the Check step of Attempt the Check

Does that sound about right, RAW? And is that what was the intent of it?


Hmm.. well I have played it as activating when you determine the skill. I have treated it as having the traits and being an Arcane check.


You're activating a power on a displayed card, that counts as playing a card. The card is a spell so you're playing a spell, and it won't work against spell (or electricity or attack etc.) immune cards. Those seem entirely clear to me, no different from e.g. Sphere of Fire and friends.

I would argue that you're also using it to "determine the skill you're using", even though you're not using a skill at all. You're using it to determine what to use instead of a skill, that should still qualify as determining the skill you're using. I think it's a bit like "before you act" or "temporary close", it's just a step in the process, you shouldn't take the name of it too literally. I would similarly expect for instance that if you use a potion of glibness on a diplomacy check then your check is considered to have the liquid trait etc. if anything cares about that.

Look at it this way, do you think you could use two different cards like this on the same check (assuming one wasn't a spell)? Could you use this and then use a weapon and add the results? Of course not. Why not? Because you can only use one card to determine which skill you're using for a check. And that one card is Chain Lightning. That's the only rule stopping you doing that. If you're comfortable saying that rule applies to stop you using Chain Lightning and a weapon then you should also be comfortable saying it adds the card's traits to the check.

So it would have the magic trait etc. from the card. Including notably the arcane trait from the card. But only from the card, not from your arcane skill, and it would not (for instance) have the intelligence/charisma trait even if that's what you rolled with originally. There's no way on earth it has the strength or melee trait


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I would play it roughly the same as Hawkmoon. Timing-wise, I would actually have this activate before you even get around to determining which skill you're using; you're not attempting any check at all but rather using a pre-rolled result. This means you cannot further modify the result with any other cards or powers. I would say that it has all of the same traits as the original check you're lifting the result from.


Why is this different from the Potion of the Ocean ruling from Vic? Specifically, the second post where he says Potion of the Ocean (a check result-setting power) is played in the "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect Your Check" step of the check attempt.


I've always played it as Hawk. But then after reading that thread I must admit it would be "clearer" if it was written something like (sorry for my english):

bad english proposition wrote:


Display this card during an encounter.
While displayed, for your combat check, roll... ; if you already used that power since that card was displayed, you must use the result and traits of that previous combat check instead, and no other powers may be played on this check.
(/QUOTE]

This way if would be clear that the power is always used "for your combat check" so at the step when you define traits...


Whether Chain Lightning's traits are applied to the check by RAW -- I'm not clear on that.

But it is clear you don't bypass immunities:

MM rulebook p.9 wrote:
If the card you’re encountering states that it is immune to a particular trait, during the encounter, characters may not play cards that have the specified trait or use powers that would add that trait to the check.

As Longshot says, choosing to activate a power on a displayed card is playing it. You can't play Chain Lightning if the monster you want to use it on is immune to any of its traits (regardless if your check has those traits).


Irgy wrote:
You're activating a power on a displayed card, that counts as playing a card. The card is a spell so you're playing a spell, and it won't work against spell (or electricity or attack etc.) immune cards.

Well. silly me, that's quite correct, of course. However...

Irgy wrote:
Those seem entirely clear to me, no different from e.g. Sphere of Fire and friends.

...it is very different than the Spheres, as the spheres expressly Determine Your Skill for The check (IIRC).

skizzerz wrote:
Timing-wise, I would actually have this activate before you even get around to determining which skill you're using; you're not attempting any check

This is literally the opposite of what the card says, and there zero Rules support to

Irgy wrote:
argue that you're also using it to "determine the skill you're using", even though you're not using a skill at all.

In fact, for my reading of the card I was going exactly off

zeroth_hour2 wrote:
Why is this different from the Potion of the Ocean ruling from Vic? Specifically, the second post where he says Potion of the Ocean (a check result-setting power) is played in the "Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect Your Check" step of the check attempt.

Going from that thread, I'm not only allowed to play powers to Modify Your Check (which would not add to the result and any dice added will be disregared; HOWEVER, any traits and effects can still be added!), but I'm also allowed- scratch that, I HAVE to Determine My Skill for the Check first.

So:

Irgy wrote:
Could you use this and then use a weapon and add the results?

In fact, I can FIRST use a Weapon (Determine Your Skill), which can add an effect like "If the check is against a bane with Construct trait, ignore its immunities", and THEN use the Chain Lightning power (in Modify Your Check) to scorch that Construct, even if it was originally immune to Attack.

This is why I can't agree that

Irgy wrote:
it would have the magic trait etc. from the card. Including notably the arcane trait from the card.
, because cards played during Modify Your Check don't add their traits to the check, and that
Irgy wrote:
There's no way on earth it has the strength or melee trait

- because I must firs Determine My Skill (which is added as a trait to the check), and without playing anything else - I default to Strength or Melee.

So, to reiterate what the situation would look like, based on the Potion of the Ocean thread linked above, and on current Rules:

- I MUST Attempt the Check
- therefor, I MUST Determine My Skill - which defaults to Strength or Meelle, but other cards like Weapons and Items can be played to determine something else. That Skill is added as Trait to the check.
- I CANNOT play Spell to Determine My Skill, as that would result in playing two spells on the check (which is illegal)
- I CAN play powers to Modify My Check (but no Spells, again): these can add Traits and effects to my check, though any dice or bonus towards teh check result are disregarded
- I CANNOT play Chain Lightning VS monsters immune to Attack and Electricity, unless I previously (in 'Determine Your Skill' or in 'Modify the Check') played a power that allows me to ignore immunities

- I CAN play Chain Lightning to 'Modify My Check'. This overrides the 'Assemble Your Dice', 'Attempt the Roll', and 'Take Damage' steps for "Attempt the Check", and I now go to the 'Attempt Next Check'/'Resolve After You Act powers' steps of the Encounter.

Again, I'm not saying that's how it's supposed to be, and in fact, I feel a little odd about it myself (hence the thread), but given the current rules, wording of Chain Lightning, and PotO thread - this seem to be the only currently supported reading for me. If you're of the opposite opinion - can you provide any rules justification for it?


Here we go...

MM Rulebook p11 emphasis mine wrote:

Determine Which Skill You’re Using ...

A few cards that can be used on checks don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll.

That is at the end of the second paragraph for "determine which skill you'r using." So, you are playing a displayed Chain Lightning during "Determine Which Skill" you are using. Sort of like Wand of Force Missile, you aren't using a skill. But, since it is playing during that part of the check, all the traits apply.

So, for Ezren, the already displayed Chain Lightning is an Arcane check due to the traits, but it is not an Intelligence check, since it doesn't use a skill at that point.

And a lot of the combos you were mentioning can't happen, since you are using it to determine the skill.

I'd also say that, while you still can "play cards and use powers to affect the check" what you can play and use has to be relevant. i.e. you can't play a card to add a die, because your check doesn't have dice to add to.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:

Here we go...

MM Rulebook p11 emphasis mine wrote:

Determine Which Skill You’re Using ...

A few cards that can be used on checks don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll.

Wow. I must admit, I'm feeling stupid right now, especially since this seems to have been around ever since RotR. I mean, I knew the "they specify the exact dice you need to roll", as it's associated with all those wands, but the "specify the result of your die roll" part somehow went completely over my head ... four base sets in a row!

Well, thanks again for the assist, Hawkmoon. Now, I'm only left to contemplate the weird dissociation between Chain Lightning et al. and the Potion of the Ocean, as they both -in a way- determine the result of your check, but are played at different times...


Well, even though it has been around since RotR, I'm not sure there were many things that "specify the result of your die roll" applied to until much more recently.

So, I wouldn't feel stupid about it. I didn't realize it was all the way back to RotR. I just went to the Mummy's Mask rulebook thinking "surely Vic, Mike, Keith, etc had to have thought of this." Even I'm surprised they thought of it so long ago.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Even I'm surprised they thought of it so long ago.

I'm going off my RotR PDF, so IDK if maybe they patched it in at a later time. The only RotR card I can think of that would qualify is Summon Monster, though that specifically says "For your combat check...", so I suppose it was naturally understood to occur in Determine Your Skill.

(And just so we're clear on the PotO - you would agree that I can play a Longsword +1 VS an Aquatic monster, and then auto-succeed with PotO on a Melee Strength Sword Magic check, correct?)


My RotR printed rulebook has it. And, yeah, I think Summon Monster might be the only thing. But as you said, it was much more obvious. I don't think I ever questioned when I should play Summon Monster. But as soon as I read your question I thought "Well, I know when I'm personally playing it, but I don't know if I've got a good reason to be playing it then."

And yes, I would agree with that on Potion of the Ocean. It turns the check into a success. You sill have to determine the skill (either by playing a card, using a power, or just going with any skill option listed by the bane) before you use Potion of the Ocean. So all the things about determining the skill apply.


Well, then, cool.

I do think this is an incredibly unintuitive rule in the sense that a thing that sets the result of a check and another thing that sets the result of a check are played at completely different times and have completely different criteria applied to them, but sure.

Now then, Zadim's Executioner power has similar text: "After you attempt a combat check against a monster, you may use the result of that check for any subsequent combat checks against that monster during the encounter."

Let's say that Zadim uses a weapon that has the Magic trait against a theoretical Incorporeal monster with 2 checks to defeat (If the check to defeat does not have the Magic trait, X is undefeated.)

-Does the second check to defeat have any traits if only the Executioner power is used, thus meaning the monster is undefeated if you only use the Executioner power to determine the result of the second check? (probably no)
-Can you add any traits to it? Eg, can Zadim use a Charm Bracelet to add the Magic trait to it? (probably yes)
-Can you add dice and traits to it? Eg, can Damiel add 1d6 plus the Fire trait? (I would think yes even though only the trait would apply, but not sure)

Zadim's power does reference "for any subsequent combat checks" though so it's clear when it's played. Now that I look at Chain Lightning again, so does that! (you may use the result of this check for any combat check you attempt at this location)


Yeah. That is where it gets tricky. Since the card telling you you can reuse the result isn't the card that gives you the result, you get weird with the traits.

I'd think that the desire would be the traits get reapplied too. I can't argue that is true for the rules, except maybe to say that "result" means not just dice but a few additional thing. But that is a stretch. So, to your specific questions I'd say:

Does the second check to defeat have any traits if only the Executioner power is used, thus meaning the monster is undefeated if you only use the Executioner power to determine the result of the second check?
Techncially, no. But maybe it should.

Can you add any traits to it? Eg, can Zadim use a Charm Bracelet to add the Magic trait to it?
Yes. I don't remember what Charm Braclet does. I think it just adds the Magic trait. Assuming so, yeah, that works.

Can you add dice _and_ traits to it? Eg, can Damiel add 1d6 plus the Fire trait?
I don't think so. I don't think you can add dice. If you do, you aren't suing the result. But... I don' think you can use thing that adjust the result. i.e. "add 5 to your result". Ausetitha, for example. Ezren can add 5 to the result when he uses displayed Chain Lightning.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:

Does the second check to defeat have any traits if only the Executioner power is used, thus meaning the monster is undefeated if you only use the Executioner power to determine the result of the second check?

Techncially, no. But maybe it should.

I'm not sure I understood Zeroth_hour's question, so to confirm: we're agreeing that just using Zadim's power does NOT reapply Magic or any other traits from the first check?

Hawkmoon269 wrote:

Can you add any traits to it? Eg, can Zadim use a Charm Bracelet to add the Magic trait to it?

Yes. I don't remember what Charm Braclet does. I think it just adds the Magic trait. Assuming so, yeah, that works.

So, even if we play result-setting card in Determine Your Skill, we can still play powers in Modify Your Check to add traits/effects? In that case

Hawkmoon269 wrote:

Can you add dice _and_ traits to it? Eg, can Damiel add 1d6 plus the Fire trait?

I don't think so. I don't think you can add dice.

...I don't see why we wouldn't be able to add dice (even if they're irrelevant), IF WE'RE ALSO adding traits with the same play (the Damiel example) - as long as they're relevant, of course.

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
But... I don' think you can use thing that adjust the result. i.e. "add 5 to your result". Ausetitha, for example. Ezren can add 5 to the result when he uses displayed Chain Lightning.

About that, Ausetitha says:

"While displayed, when you play a card of your favored type on a check, after the roll you may add or subtract five from the result"

- So, you're not making a roll on the second check, so Au seems to be obviously disqualified from applying. However, would be different if it said "after you determine the result of your check"?
- if yes, and I played Chain Lightning on the first check with Channa Ti (Favored Card: Spell) - do we agree Au *would* apply when Chain Lightning is used on the second check?
- if yes, and we use Zadim's power for the second check - we're not playing the "favored card type", but - for argument's sake- does using a power on the character/role card constitute "playing a card"? (I feel like I should know the answer to that, but can't for the life of me remember what the official stance is).


Yeah, as written right now, Zadim doesn't seem to carry over traits, just the number. I'm just saying I wonder if maybe he should carry over traits too.

For the part about traits, I guess it depends on whether you can use a power that only partially applies. Do you ignore the impossible part (adding dice) or does not being able to add dice make the power not affect the check? I'm not sure I know.

As for Ausetitha, I forgot she said "after the roll" that does give me pause. Though, here is the thing: When you go through attempting the check, do you still do all the parts? Here is how they are named:

Attempting a Check
Determine which skill you’re using.
Determine the difficulty.
Play cards and use powers that affect the check (optional).
Assemble your dice.
Attempt the roll.
Take damage if you fail a check to defeat a monster.

The only one that is called out as optional is "Play cards and use powers that affect the check." Everything else seems to happen, even if you don't do anything during that part. i.e. "Assemble your dice" is still part of the check even if you have no dice to assemble. "Attempt the roll" is actually where you get a result. So that really seems to happen. So, I'm thinking Ausetitha sill applies. Maybe.


Nice ;)
Pathfinder is like universum. A full of mystery and unknown!


Nice candidate for the return of the long gone can'o'worms weekly contest.
Wake up Mike... :-)


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
For the part about traits, I guess it depends on whether you can use a power that only partially applies. Do you ignore the impossible part (adding dice) or does not being able to add dice make the power not affect the check?

I wouldn't say you ignore adding the dice as "impossible', as there's nothing impossible about it; rather, you just 'skip' it. Even if you did, adding a (relevant) trait most certainly *does* affect the check, so I don't see what would prevent you from doing it - especially as this happens first in Modidfy Your Check, while adding the 'impossible' dice happens later - in Assemble Your Dice.

However, my belief, as stated above is, you just 'skip' some of the Attempt teh Check steps - 'Assemble Your Dice', 'Attempt the Roll', and 'Take Damage'- but you're doing it not so much because they're 'impossible', as because they're irrelevant (no point in rolling the dice, if the result of the check is pre-set; not point in assembling the dice if you're not gonna roll them). So, just as if (for whatever tactical consideration) you decided to apply the pre-set result to a check higher than it - you're gonna do a Take Damage step, so are you going to take an Assemble the Dice step, if for example the was a theoretical power in effect like "When you assemble your dice for a check, recharge a number of cards from your discard pile equal to the number of dice".
Does that sound about right?

Hawkmoon269 wrote:
As for Ausetitha, I forgot she said "after the roll" that does give me pause. Though, here is the thing: When you go through attempting the check, do you still do all the parts? ... "Attempt the roll" is actually where you get a result. So that really seems to happen. So, I'm thinking Ausetitha sill applies.

As per my above argument - I'd agree, that yes, all parts of Attempt the check still happen, even if nothing happens during them (wasn't there an express statement to that point in the rulebook, or I'm thinking of a dev post somewhere on the forums?)

And yes, Ausethina would usually take effect in the Attempt the Roll step, but she specifies after the roll- which I don't take to specify "during the Attempt the Roll step", as much as it literally meaning "after the real roll of the dice proper"; since there was no roll to speak of - she'd be illegal. IMHO.


IMHO a copy has to be a complete copy or it is not a copy. So the best thing is to think that the card creater Virtual copy of itself. But yeah it need some rule clarification.


So is the following a reasonable summary?

There's two different sorts of non-dice-rolling, check-defeating cards:
1. Cards that determine a value to use, such as Chain Lightning and Summon Monster. With these cards you're activating a power in the "determine which skill you're using" step. These cards add their own traits, and those traits might not match the traits when you originally rolled (in cases where you even did such a thing). In the case of Cleave it feels a little odd but that's how it works currently.

2. Cards that don't determine a value, but make you auto-pass without rolling, such as Potion of the Ocean and presumably other potions and similar cards. These are played in the "Play cards and use powers that affect the check (optional)." step. They don't automatically add traits. They have to work this way, at least in some cases, because they can help another character, and you can't help another character during the "determine which skill you're using" step.

In case (2) you must still "determine which skill you're using", and if a card is involved in that then you will add its traits. You can also (according to the Potion of the Ocean thread) play powers which won't impact the result just to add traits. Though part of the reason why is that you can play them before choosing to use the potion.

In case (1), you probably can't modify the value at all with any other powers, though that's less clear in some cases than others. It's also not clear whether you can play such powers to add traits when they can't impact the value. Does affecting the check include affecting just the traits?


So, thinking about the Zadim question more. I'm wondering if it ever actually matters. Can anyone find a bane that requires 2 combat checks to defeat and where a specific trait is required? I have not been able to as of yet. If anything, I've found one villain where Zadim would benefit from the "traitless" second check. The Defiled One from WotR deals everyone at your location damage if your check has the Melee trait. Zadim would avoid that on the second check. Which seems fitting, since he basically kills the villain so quickly it can't even retaliate.

But are there any real examples where Executioner Zadim's second check not having a trait is a hindrance?


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
If anything, I've found one villain where Zadim would benefit from the "traitless" second check.

If anything, there's a bunch of Undead in MM where it can help. My Zadim has both the Scorpion Whip and Thousand Stings whip (both Posion), so I've been using Enbalming Fluid and Druid of the Hive to bypass poison resistances. The Executioner power would actually help for those pesky double-check Undead (Coffer Corpse?) that would require me to bypass immunity twice.

...Which reminds me - if I reveal Embalming Fluid to add 2 Posion to my check, and ignore the monster's immunity to Poison - does the "ignore" last for that check only, or for the whole encounter?

Mu gut says only the check on which it's played, but I seem to remember a thread on the subject in WOtR, where it was implied the "ignores" last for the whole turn?


That thread about ignoring immunity was here. It lasts for the duration of you dealing with that card.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
But are there any real examples where Executioner Zadim's second check not having a trait is a hindrance?

Pazuzu from Season of the Righteous. The checks require the Mythic trait or else it goes up by 10. (In my solo run I will attempt to bypass it by using Mythic Champion, since the power ignores all increases AFAIK even if you only use it once.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

All it does it give you a result. Here's how it breaks down in the steps of the encounter:

Determine Which Skill You’re Using. The first paragraph says you get to choose any of the listed skills for your check. So you choose a skill (this is essential for the "Determine the Difficulty" step to function). In the second paragraph, we see that "A few cards that can be used on checks don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll." So even though you chose a skill, you don't use it for the check. Then the result of the sentence "The skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, are added as traits to the check" is that no traits are being added to the check at this time.

Determine the Difficulty: All applies as usual.

Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect Your Check (Optional): As usual, but note that since you already have a result, you can't play cards or use powers whose only effect is determining a result.

Assemble Your Dice: "The skill you’re using and the cards you played determine the number and type of dice you roll," and since none of those things actually did that thing, nothing actually happens here.

Attempt the Roll: Since you have no dice, none of the die rolling stuff applies, but you do process this: "If the result is greater than or equal to the difficulty of the check, you
succeed. If the result is lower than the difficulty, you fail." And then you go on from there as usual.

So, as written, it gives you a result, and only a result. It doesn't use a skill, or add a trait.


Ok so we played it totally wrong.
So I can use the chain lightning result on a bane that is immune to the attack trait.
And I can use it against a ghost but unless I have a way to add the magic trait to that chack the ghost won't be defeated.

Thanks for the clarification.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vic Wertz wrote:
Determine Which Skill You’re Using. The first paragraph says you get to choose any of the listed skills for your check. So you choose a skill (this is essential for the "Determine the Difficulty" step to function). In the second paragraph, we see that "A few cards that can be used on checks don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll." So even though you chose a skill, you don't use it for the check. Then the result of the sentence "The skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, are added as traits to the check" is that no traits are being added to the check at this time.

In the next paragraph of the rules it says:

"Some cards may allow you to replace the required skill for a check with a different one; ... When you play a card that does this, add that card’s traits to the check;"

You don't mention this paragraph explicitly, but I assume you're saying that the text telling you to add the card's traits to the check does not apply here. Presumably because this is not "replacing the required skill for [the] check with a different one"? I had assumed that replacing the required skill with no skill still qualified as "replacing the skill with a different one".

What disturbs me about this interpretation is that it would also mean that cards like "Fire Lance" (which my Damiel is using) do not add their traits to the check either. It seems very counterintuitive that blasting a monster with alchemical fire from a magic flamethrower does not add the fire trait to the check (and thus will not kill a troll), just because the weapon happens to require no skill to use.

Frencois wrote:
So I can use the chain lightning result on a bane that is immune to the attack trait.

No, you still can't:

"If the card you’re encountering states that it is immune to a particular trait, players may not play cards with the specified trait, use powers that would add that trait to the check, or roll dice with that trait during the encounter."

Even though it is not a "power that would add that trait to the check", it's still a "card with the specified trait" and so you still can't play it.


Irgy wrote:
Frencois wrote:
So I can use the chain lightning result on a bane that is immune to the attack trait.

No, you still can't:

"If the card you’re encountering states that it is immune to a particular trait, players may not play cards with the specified trait, use powers that would add that trait to the check, or roll dice with that trait during the encounter."

Even though it is not a "power that would add that trait to the check", it's still a "card with the specified trait" and so you still can't play it.

+1.

I said this above, but this is an extremely busy thread.

To use the result of Chain Lightning on a subsequent check, you choose to activate a power on the displayed Chain Lightning; this means you are playing Chain Lightning; and as Irgy says, you can't do that if the monster is immune to a trait on the card.

Irgy wrote:
It seems very counterintuitive ...

+1 to this too.

Vic has confirmed the RAW, but it's a bad result. Blasting anything with Chain Lightning should have the Magic and Electricity traits. It doesn't make sense that the first check you use it on does and later ones don't.


Vic Wertz wrote:
Then the result of the sentence "The skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, are added as traits to the check" is that no traits are being added to the check at this time.

First, Vic, thanks for bringing us the official low-down of it all.

Second, might I suggest that -unless it brutally breaks any existing cards- it would be more intuitive and consistent, if the following rule is updated with the bolded part:

"When you’re playing a card to determine the skill or dice you’re using or the result of the check, that card’s traits are also added to the check;"

This would probably avoid:

1) As it pertains to this thread - *playing a spell*, without actually adding any of the relevant traits

2) On a more fundamental level, my understanding of cards like the Wands was just turned upside down: it now turns out I can't play Wand of Scorching Ray against monsters immune to Attack, but then my CHECK DOESN'T have the Attack trait if I do play it; also, it appears I can defeat a measly Ghost with Scorching Ray *spell*, but I *cannot* defeat it by playing WoSR - as Magic trait is not added to the check. Both of those things seem really counter-intuitive, and I'd be surprised if I turn out to be the only one confused on the matter.

EDIT: Lol, oddly enough ninja'd by an hour...


Longshot11 wrote:

Second, might I suggest that -unless it brutally breaks any existing cards- it would be more intuitive and consistent, if the following rule is updated with the bolded part:

"When you’re playing a card to determine the skill or dice you’re using or the result of the check, that card’s traits are also added to the check;"

Another alternative would be to change:

"Some cards may allow you to replace the required skill for a check with a different one;"

to

"Some cards may allow you to replace the required skill for a check;"

Then that sentence (and more importantly the bit that follows about adding the traits) would actually cover the cases which I (and probably a lot of other people) already thought it covered.


Irgy wrote:
Frencois wrote:
So I can use the chain lightning result on a bane that is immune to the attack trait.

No, you still can't:

"If the card you’re encountering states that it is immune to a particular trait, players may not play cards with the specified trait, use powers that would add that trait to the...

Ooops yes of course.

OK definitively that's a really nice can'o'worms the type of which seemed to have disappear a year ago. So:
A) Thanks Vic for the RAW clarification.
B) +1 for "counterintuitiveness", so something maybe could be changed at some point. IMHO.


Longshot11 wrote:
EDIT: Lol, oddly enough ninja'd by an hour...

Me too. (Was I typing for 30 minutes??)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

I'm surprised that you find it counterintuitive. I find it counterintuitive to assume that a thing that says "use the result" really means "use the result and the traits."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I mean, I 'd agree that's what the wording says. I think people are more speaking about the intuition (either in a real physical sense or even the RPG underpinnings of the game) of casting chain lightning at a group of monsters and killing them all... but only having one of them take lightning damage.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Vic, I don't think Longshot means that it is counterintuitive in the sense of the rule being counterintuitive (but as I'm not Longshot, I don't know for sure.) It's more that the rules create situations that are counterintuitive, like a Chain Lightning power usage causing the Ghost to be undefeated, despite the fact you're using a power on a magic spell to defeat the Ghost.

So in other words, it's not that "use the result" only using the result is counterintuitive. Rather that activating the power of Chain Lightning only using the result is counterintuitive, as it creates unintuitive situations. Moreover, it mainly creates _bad_ unintuitive situations. A Chain Lightning result can't be used on a Shock Toad (immune), but a Chain Lightning result can't be used to defeat a Fire Hydra either (no trait added).

Clinging Venom also has this problem, but it's a fairly edgy case. If it's used on the Rukh (Combat 13/13), and the result is 15, do you defeat it? No, because the Attack trait fell off on the second combat check, so the difficulty of the second check is increased by 4 (to 17). You take 2 damage. But world-intuition-wise that means that somehow the Clinging Venom is somehow not a magical attack spell anymore (or venomous, for that matter) by the time it got to the second check.

"Allow for abstractions", yes, but I think this is a bit of a stretch.

(Ninja'd)


Vic Wertz wrote:
I'm surprised that you find it counterintuitive. I find it counterintuitive to assume that a thing that says "use the result" really means "use the result and the traits."

What's counterintuitive is that the effect of a fire lance is not considered fire by the game rules, and similarly chain lightning not considered electric.

As far as the rules go though, we're not assuming "use the result" means "use the result and the traits" in a vacuum. We're assuming it with reference to a paragraph in the rulebook that explicitly tells you to add the traits in a large number of almost identical cases.

Also, in that regard, I do find fire lance much more counterintuitive than chain lightning, since whereas chain lightning is clearly a new and unique thing, fire lance is very similar to a normal weapon. The only difference is that it doesn't list a skill, and why that ought to affect whether it's fire damage or not is hard to fathom.

This is all assuming our interpretation of what you said is correct and fire lance does indeed not add the traits. We could be wrong about that, especially with regards to the intention, it's just hard to see how in the rules themselves.


Just to add that I'm exactly in line with all those remarks.
We agree Vic that rules are clear.

What's counterintuitive is that a spell like Chain Lightning or Sphere of something used in a row against multiple enemies in the RPG has the same characteristics on every enemy.
Example: if you empower that spell for example when you cast it, that empowering will affect all effects on all enemies.
Here if you add traits when you first "cast" the spell... well they are only valid for the first enemy...
And... (and that is VERY different from the RPG), when the lightning chains from an enemy to another you can add new traits at that time (we never did that in the PACG... because we never realized we could - bad RPG habits).

OK, that's the PACG rule, now we get it, we'll get used to it, but that took a while to grasp and assimilate for RPG guys.

And that's just what I meant by counterintuitive. Nothing more.


Irgy wrote:
Also, in that regard, I do find fire lance much more counterintuitive than chain lightning, since whereas chain lightning is clearly a new and unique thing, fire lance is very similar to a normal weapon. The only difference is that it doesn't list a skill, and why that ought to affect whether it's fire damage or not is hard to fathom.

^This.

Yes, Chain Light is new, and -even though *unintuitive*, as other people also explained above- it's fine to "get used to".

However, this ruling (in my view) turns upside down the whole concept of Wands (that I count the Fire Lance towards), which go as far back as RotR. Several things I *don't believe*:
- I don't believe you intended Wand of Scorching to be useless against Incorporeal
- I don't believe you intended that a Wand of Force Missile check is Arcane, but for some reason Wand of Scorching is not
- I don't believe you intended the Wands to actually have different check traits than their name-sake spells

...because if you did, any of the above would be *unintuitive*, in a -hopefully- fairly obvious manner.


Maybe we aren't quite talking about the same thing here and that is why there is some confusion.

Vic Wertz wrote:

Determine Which Skill You’re Using. The first paragraph says you get to choose any of the listed skills for your check. So you choose a skill (this is essential for the "Determine the Difficulty" step to function). In the second paragraph, we see that "A few cards that can be used on checks don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll." So even though you chose a skill, you don't use it for the check. Then the result of the sentence "The skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, are added as traits to the check" is that no traits are being added to the check at this time.

...

So, as written, it gives you a result, and only a result. It doesn't use a skill, or add a trait.

Vic is saying that the sentence "The skill you’re using for the check, and any skill referenced by that skill, are added as traits to the check" doesn't do anything because you aren't using a skill. In other words, if you don't use a skill, that means no skill becomes a trait for check. But Chain Lightning doesn't add the Magic trait to the check because of the skill you use. It adds the Magic trait because the Magic trait is a trait of the card. So the question is about this:

Determine Which Skill You're Using wrote:
When you’re playing a card to determine the skill you’re using, that card’s traits are also added to the check.

Does that apply to already displayed Chain Lightning? We'd have to determine two things:

The first is whether you are playing already displayed Chain Lightning. It seems you are.

The second is whether you are playing it "to determine the skill you're using". And that might be the real issue. It clearly isn't determining the skill. But does that phrase mean (A) the card has to actually determine the skill or (B) the card has to be played during the "determine the skill" part?

I'd taken it to mean (B). Maybe I'd been wrong and maybe it means (A). But I'm not sure Vic was saying that it means (A). I think Vic was simply saying since you aren't using a skill for the check, a skill doesn't become a trait on the check.

Vic Wertz wrote:
I'm surprised that you find it counterintuitive. I find it counterintuitive to assume that a thing that says "use the result" really means "use the result and the traits."

Even here, Vic is basically saying something akin to "You can't use the previous results and previous traits." Which makes sense. But it isn't the same as saying "You can't use the previous results and apply new traits based on the card you played during the 'determine the skill' part." I think we all agree it looks like you don't use the previous traits. But have we really said you don't get to add the traits by playing the card again?

Also, keep in mind Zadim is different from Chain Lightning. Since Zadim is what lets you reapply the result, you aren't playing the same "skill determining" card again. So you don't take advantage of that rule about the card you play adding it's traits.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Maybe we aren't quite talking about the same thing here and that is why there is some confusion.

So at the end of his response Vic says:

Vic Wertz wrote:
So, as written, it gives you a result, and only a result. It doesn't use a skill, or add a trait.

We took that to mean he's saying it doesn't add any traits at all to the check. Including not adding the card's traits to the check.

But maybe he just meant it doesn't add the arcane + intelligence/charisma/whatever trait from the skill, but he wasn't saying anything about whether you add the card's traits according to the other part of the rules that he doesn't directly refer to.

I hope you're right on that Hawkmoon, because it all makes a lot more sense in that case.

By the way, where's the most up-to-date and official version of the rules these days? I was going off a version I downloaded from the paizo site somewhere, though it was RotR rules. Your words you're quoting aren't the same as mine Hawkmoon (though still they have a similar range of possible interpretations) so I worry I'm not looking at the best source.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Irgy wrote:
By the way, where's the most up-to-date and official version of the rules these days? I was going off a version I downloaded from the paizo site somewhere, though it was RotR rules. Your words you're quoting aren't the same as mine Hawkmoon (though still they have a similar range of possible interpretations) so I worry I'm not looking at the best source.

The most recently published adventure path's rules (with FAQs) are the official current version. You can find all the adventure path's here:

http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety/acg/resources. Mummy's Mask is the most recent, so it is the current rules.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So, I think I'm getting my wires crossed as to what Vic is trying to indicate. If he is saying that you do not add the previous result's traits to the new result, that's fine. It stops you from going down a memory rabbit hole where you have to remember every trait that was added to the check a while ago. I'm more fond of it remembering the traits as well, but Allow For Abstractions and not having to remember minute details makes for more streamlined gameplay.

If he is saying that by nature of you using a result, that NO traits are added to the check at all (in other words, none of the traits on Chain Lightning are added), then that is incredibly counterintuitive and also dumb.

For example, say that a Toxic Cloud was displayed when the monster was encountered, and then Chain Lightning was played for the combat check. The first check gets an extra 1d6 and the Poison trait, in addition to the traits on Chain Lightning and the Intelligence trait (assuming the person attempting the check has Arcane: Intelligence +X). Part of the result included the Intelligence die as well as the Poison die (1d6).

Later on in the same turn, a monster that is immune to Poison is encountered. You can use the same result from the original Chain Lightning according to what Vic said above. Toxic Cloud doesn't apply to this check since you a) can't add dice with a trait to something immune to that trait, and b) you aren't rolling any dice so adding more dice is pointless. The Chain Lightning result works even though it was originally poisonous (and the result still reflects that extra poison effect). I find this counterintuitive, but per my comment in the first paragraph this is more ok due to the extra memory burden. Allow for Abstractions can be in full force here and it'll be fine.

Later on in the same turn, a Ghost is encountered. You can use the same result from the original Chain Lightning, and Toxic Cloud still has no effect on this check. However, do we add the traits from the Chain Lightning card itself (i.e. does the result gain the Magic trait)? The rulebook is not clear on this point as per Hawkmoon's post. Hawkmoon's reading (A) says that Ghost would be undefeated despite you zapping it with a spell, whereas reading (B) says that Ghost would be defeated. I think that reading (B) is the correct reading, in that playing a card during the Determine Which Skill You're Using step is what adds that card's traits to the check, not that the card itself has to determine the skill (as opposed to telling you what dice to roll or what result to use). Official confirmation that (B) is the correct reading would be desirable, but absent confirmation to the contrary, (B) is how I will be playing it from here on out.


This is part of the problem with making things sound like natural English, then using steps that are conflated with the actual thing you're doing (but can also do other things). Magic the Gathering, for example, tends to use more logic-like language (even if it's still mostly English) so it has less of this problem, but it still did - "at end of turn" I think was a big issue before they added the cleanup step.

"Before you act" was a culprit of this.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:

The most recently published adventure path's rules (with FAQs) are the official current version. You can find all the adventure path's here:

http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety/acg/resources. Mummy's Mask is the most recent, so it is the current rules.

Thanks!

I think what I was looking at was from there but I picked the RotR rules. I kind of expected this sort of generic rule to be consistently worded between the different editions in the pdf version but I can understand them having better things to do.

Anyway, reading this wording, I am now thoroughly convinced that:
1. Vic was only telling us not to automatically add the traits from the original check when reusing the result. Vic was not commenting in any way on whether to add the traits from the spell as a result of playing the spell.
2. The traits should be added according to RAW. The wording I looked up:
* "Some cards may allow you to replace the required skill for a check with a different one..."
was ambiguous and the most technical interpretation leaned towards needing to be replacing a skill with an actual skill.
The MM wording:
* "When you’re playing a card to determine the skill you’re using, that card’s traits are also added to the check"
is still also technically ambiguous, but it's much more natural to interpret it as referring to the whole paragraph including the "A few cards that can be used on checks don’t use any of your skills; they instead specify the exact dice you need to roll or the result of your die roll." part.


Hawkmoon269 wrote:
Maybe we aren't quite talking about the same thing here and that is why there is some confusion...

I hear what you're saying, however, what I think is happening is we're interpreting Vic saying

Vic Wertz wrote:
So, as written, it gives you a result, and only a result. It doesn't use a skill, or add a trait.

in the context of the rule

Rulebook wrote:
When you’re playing a card to determine the skill you’re using, that card’s traits are also added to the check

So we take his "It doesn't use a skill" to mean "you're *not* playing it to determine the skill you're using", which therefore equals "you're not adding the card's traits to the check". I concur this *shouldn't* be the correct way the rules work, but I perhaps read too much into Vic's "as written", which I took to mean "regardless of usability or other considerations, this is how the rules currently work, until (a possible but not guaranteed) further notice". So yeah, it probably best that Vic chimes back in, one way or the other.

skizzerz wrote:
Later on in the same turn, a Ghost is encountered. You can use the same result from the original Chain Lightning, and Toxic Cloud still has no effect on this check. However, do we add the traits from the Chain Lightning card itself (i.e. does the result gain the Magic trait)? The rulebook is not clear on this point as per Hawkmoon's post. Hawkmoon's reading (A) says that Ghost would be undefeated despite you zapping it with a spell, whereas reading (B) says that Ghost would be defeated.

Wait, why would Toxic Clud have no effect? In your previous paragraph you're saying (correctly, per the current RAW) that the 1d6 Poison is "integrated" in the Chain Lightning roll, so it would apply?

Also, I believe Hawk was siding with Option A, but the Cloud spells open a whole other "can of worms", imho, so I'll split that discussion in a separate thread.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, PF Special Edition, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sorry for the confusion. Toxic Cloud applies just fine to the original result. It does not apply again when using the original result on a subsequent check, as you are not rolling any dice. (So if you rolled a 16 originally including the bump from Toxic Cloud, you don't get 16 + 1d6 the next time, because adding dice to a static result doesn't make sense as you never attempt any rolls when using a static result. As such, you just get the 16 for subsequent checks). In other words, you are not allowed to double-dip on Toxic Cloud.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So I hate to reopen this super old thread, but which is it?

Chain Lightning does add electricity, Arcane, magic, attack traits to the subsequent checks after the first or it doesn't? Or does it still count as an intelligence (if that's what your Arcane is under) as well? Or does the check have no traits? Or do you get to pick a skill upon encountering and you simply get the same result using only that skill's traits, say Combat, melee?


According to Vic in this thread, after the first check, all you have is the result (a number) - no traits at all.

(Which I still think is an unfortunate ruling because it's so unlike one's natural expectations.)

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Card Game / Rules Questions and Gameplay Discussion / Chain Lightning (and similar) - what is going on exactly? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.