he gets the bonus if he is only next to one foe and not any other foes, but can be next to allies or noncombatants
This.
Search Posts
Hunh. Yup. Spend it if you got it I guess. And a special thanks for pointing out to me where the FAQs are for the books!
*chuckle* Just toss the pebble with your hands :-p
Gimme a link, Cheapy? How is it possible to craft an item with a higher caster level than the creator possesses?
The creator's caster level must be as high as the item's caster level, so you're looking at a minimum level of 7 before an Amulet of Spell Cunning could be crafted.
More Hit Points. Foozle should always have more HP than a PC can dish out in damage in a single turn.
Only "A", AFAIK.
With magical crafting, let's just say that the material can only absorb magical energy at a certain rate under good conditions and at half that rate under poor ones. That'll fluff both to match the RAW. You're getting crafting and magic item creation mixed again when they aren't mixed at all in the game, RAW. The crafting info I posted is for ordinary crafting. Magic item creation doesn't work that way. With Magic Items you determine the numbers needed based on the price in Gold and after the hours have been spent make a single spellcraft check against the DC where exceeding it means success and failing by 5 or more creates a cursed item.
We can fluff it however we want, but the RAW doesn't provide for additional crafting or magical crafting with additional viable time available (as opposed to additional actual time as can be accomplished with planar stuff and whatnnot). With crafting, it's easy enough to say that crafters already use all of a day's available hours to craft. No sunlight at 2am whether or not you're awake. If they aren't using all of a day's available hours, then the ring wouldn't help anyway because they've demonstrated they would rather do something other than crafting with the extra hours. With magical crafting, let's just say that the material can only absorb magical energy at a certain rate under good conditions and at half that rate under poor ones. That'll fluff both to match the RAW.
Non-magical crafting doesn't happen in hours - it happens in weeks and has an utterly different process than magical crafting.
The 8 hour limitation is specific to magical crafting and additional rest should have no effect which allows more than 8 hours of magical crafting in a 24 hour period.
IMO, being a willing target for purposes of the spell does not imply the conscious decision to drop spell resistance. So your Cleric is going to need to beat his SR to heal him.
Its not your dex, its the nature of a swarm, swarming you know. but of course now that I have been called to task, I can't find the rule. Disregard until I find a source. Probably a legacy of when you had to pick an opponent for dodge to apply against in 3.5
When you get 8 hours of sleep, you are 'resetting' the day again. Based on what? I can't find anything in the rules that implies that.
It seems this would be useful: This ring continually provides its wearer with life-sustaining nourishment. The ring also refreshes the body and mind, so that its wearer needs only sleep 2 hours per day to gain the benefit of 8 hours of sleep. This allows a spellcaster that requires rest to prepare spells to do so after only 2 hours, but this does not allow a spellcaster to prepare spells more than once per day. The ring must be worn for a full week before it begins to work. If it is removed, the owner must wear it for another week to reattune it to himself.
More importantly, there's an upper limit on time spent per day: The caster can work for up to 8 hours each day. So even with a ring of sustenance, you top out at 8 hours spent, 4 hours credit per day in the field.
Druid is also nice as a 2 level dip for a melee class if you take the Shaping Focus feat from UM. You now have the ability to be a Dire Tiger for 6 hours out of the day, and you have pounce.I was thinking about this myself but i don't think it would actually work. Wild Shape class feature is a prerequisite for the feat and you don't actually get wild shape until 4th level. True, but you're not losing much. 2->4 is full BAB progression for the Druid, gives you 2nd level spells (hello, Bulls Strength!), and if you go Reincarnated you get those nice +4s against death, energy drain, etc.
Yup - the first one, though I might give the poor scrawny little thing its full first HD instead of the printed average if my player asked nicely.
Please explain why, then, that if Int 13 and Combat Expertise are needed to avoid AoOs for combat maneuvers, why it is not a prerequisite for all combat maneuvers. I thought I just did that - the ability to perform combat maneuvers is available to anyone. I could attempt to trip you. The ability to perform combat maneuvers without becoming vulnerable in the process is unusual and the INT13+ represents that raw ability while the Combat Expertise feat represents the disciplined focus on using that raw ability in combat. The Combat Expertise discipline grants a more conservative, "mistake-free" fighting style which gives access to non-vulnerable combat maneuvers and also lets you boost your AC at a cost to attack bonus. @Kaiyanwang Think Batman. There is a mental component to using that style of fighting well.
You are attempting to make an argument that is based on itself. Not at all. I'm saying that in the game, in the same way that some people have the ability to cast nth level spells and some don't, some have the ability to make Power Attacks and some don't, some have the ability to have eldritch bloodlines and some don't - some have the ability to learn how to use the types of maneuvers which branch off the combat expertise tree and some don't. Why require a CHA of 13+ to take the first Eldritch bloodline feat? A Sorcerer could get it with a CHA of 11. Why require a 19 Wisdom for 9th level Cleric spells - are there no gods for the unwise and do they not have champions? What's the difference between Str 12 and Str 13 that magically makes power attacking available? It's a game. That's why. Those ability scores represent in an abstract way the inherent abilities necessary to gain those abilities in a balanced way. INT 13 simply happens to stand in for the Fighter's inherent ability with the Combat Expertise tree. If you want to argue that stupid folks can learn to trip well, my response to that is already documented - they can't learn to do it well enough not to make themselves vulnerable at the same time. I won't deny your rogue's gallery the right to trip, only the ability to do it without consequence. The ability to do it without consequence is reserved for those who both have the inherent ability and then discipline themselves to train that ability.
Sure, let's narrow it down. We'll only talk about heroic fighters in the game. They are inherently capable of tripping. However, all heroic fighters in the game are NOT inherently capable of tripping without leaving themselves vulnerable. It may be that they lack the discipline, it may be that they lack the comprehension of what is required, it may be some other reason - the game doesn't specify. It is, however, clear that not all heroic fighters have what it takes to learn to trip without making themselves vulnerable. The way that gap between those who do have the inherent ability to learn that and those who don't is codified in a requirement of INT 13+.
First, I didn't come up with the term. I'm trying to use the term which has been used throughout the thread to talk about fighters who use certain types of combat maneuvers. It is a way to differentiate these types of fighting so that we can have a discussion. Second, just because I can attempt to trip an Aikido master doesn't mean I'm going to get away with it. My trip attempt will provoke an attack of opportunity. I would argue that very few people both have the natural gifts and are capable of disciplining themselves to learn how to trip folks without making themselves vulnerable in the process. You act as if the ability to trip and the ability to trip without leaving yourself vulnerable are very similar things, when in the real world, almost everyone can trip and very few indeed can do it without making themselves vulnerable. That's the difference being codified here.
Why isn't the Improved [Combat Maneuver] feat itself a sufficient pre-requisite for being able to perform said combat maneuver? Because feats will always be acquired as opposed to inherent abilities. My question was whether everyone is inherently capable of "clever" fighting. If not, then there should be an attribute requirement. Aldin, This still does not explain the wolf or the knockdown rage power in barbarians. Sure it does - all Wolves are inherently capable of tripping as part of a normal attack routine which doesn't leave them vulnerable. Barbarian rage powers are extraordinary powers that are inherent to their class.
You split the available HD at any given level. 4th level=3HD. I don't see any way to interpret it differently.
EDIT Nevermind - misread it.
And for the second question, if he was 4th level or higher I'd probably have allowed him to use his Slow Fall ability. Moreover, I'm a bit confused as to how a 20ft. fall instantly killed him. Assuming a CON of at least 10 and at least 1HP, you'd have needed to roll a 12 on 2d6 to instakill him. A CON of 11 or 2HP and he at least has a chance to stabilize.
Hmmm, let me try to put this in a different perspective: Is every heroic fighter inherently capable of "clever" fighting? Or perhaps, should every heroic fighter be inherently capable of "clever" fighting? I would have to say "no". In fiction, a lot of heroic fighters show no aptitude for that style of combat. In the real world, very few seem to have the capacity to discipline their bodies to that degree. So potentially the question should be "which attribute best represents the cleverness and discipline needed to use those styles of fighting"? As such, I think Intelligence - which measures not only the raw smarts, but also the discipline of the Wizard - is a good choice.
Is this a universal problem or is everyone finding new posts to be unaccessible?
Free actions don't take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn. I'd say that's a circumstance in which the number of free actions you can perform in a turn may be limited :D
No you couldn't. You can only make potions, scrolls and wands using wordspells.
The Barbarian tribes' Shamans have been praying for such a feat. This boon of the gods would allow them to dance around the battlefield making full, raging iterative attacks! No foe will be safe with their action economy finally assured.
My first thought was Barbarian as well. Level 6 gets you enough of the class to be really, really tough against almost anything if you make good choices on rage powers.
You provoke an AoO if you haven't rigorously disciplined your tripping technique to the point where you can do it without making yourself vulnerable in a combat situation. In this case, the ability necessary to undergo that rigorous discipline is represented by INT and entered into through Combat Expertise.False. Combat Expertise in no way, shape, or form "trains" you to be good at tripping. Improved Trip does that. Combat Expertise stands in the way. You get no bonus to trip from Int. Combat Expertise provides no bonus to tripping. *chuckle* Not what I said. What I said, in simple language, is that the prereq for Improved Trip is INT13+Combat Expertise. Moreover, I interpreted that prereq as the demonstrated ability to undergo rigorous discipline as it relates to the feat tree.
What's wrong with a 15 Fighter triggering an 8 Fighter or even a 1 Wizard's AoO? They aren't going to do any damage in anything but exceptionally lucky circumstances anyway. You provoke an AoO if you haven't rigorously disciplined your tripping technique to the point where you can do it without making yourself vulnerable in a combat situation. In this case, the ability necessary to undergo that rigorous discipline is represented by INT and entered into through Combat Expertise.
My response introducing fantasy archetypes was in direct response to Tim's plea to fantasy archetypes as a reason not to have the INT requirement. To a certain extent, I think the feat tree is using Intelligence as the closest thing the system has to a "Discipline" stat. So what is being said is that only disciplined fighters will hone their skills and we can use INT as a measuring stick for discipline. It certainly wouldn't be the only case in the game of using a stat to represent something other than what might seem to be implied by the stat (Wisdom for Perception, Strength for BAB, etc.)
Disarming opponents and tricky fighting are a mainstay of what we IMAGINE warriors doing, an extremely common feature of the books and films that inspire tabletop roleplaying games, and yet it feels more difficult to represent in the game than it should. Why? You take an INT of 13. Is that difficult? Fantasy archetype fighters are often some of the smartest guys on the field. I think as players we sometimes have a tendency to *cheat* just a bit here, taking advantage of our brainpower and our Fighter/Sorcerer/Cleric/etc's dump stat. Not even necessarily on purpose, but simply because we can't help but to think the way we think. I like the concept of the intelligent fighter and I'm glad there is a useful feat tree that causes that intelligent fantasy archetype to emerge.
A dex-based fighter doesn't risk getting hit in the face every time they try to use their fighting style. A combat maneuver build without the combat maneuver feats does. That's a non-trivial difference in effectiveness. Which is why combat maneuver builds have an Int of 13. How is this rocket science? You want an eldritch heritage you have a cha of 13+. You want concealing stances you have a dex of 13+. You want to play a combat manuever build you have an int of 13+. Just the basics of the builds.
It is always SAD when folks want to eliminate unusual requirements in the pursuit of exceptional abilities. I must be MAD to love the opportunities provided by the differentiations possible within a theme.
How good is +3 AC going to do you vs CR 8 enemies? Or better yet, +2 vs CR 7 enemies? They answer is little to none. No it isn't. The answer is that with the +3 they will miss you 15% of the time they roll on results that would otherwise have been hits (also nice for preventing crit confirms). Substitute +2 and 10% for the CR7. By way of example, let's say that without the +2 they hit you on an 11+. That's a 50% chance to hit. With the +2 they need a 13+ and have only a 40% chance to hit. So instead of taking 5 hits out of 10 you take 4. It scales even better to a second iterative attack which drops from a 25% chance to hit to 15% - a 40% loss.
In absence of a specific exclusion, I'd go with the general statement: "Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area or on the same recipient." Both ought to work.
Feel free to tell me I'm an idiot, but I NEVER realized before today that Delay Poison grants poison immunity if used before the poisoning happens. Man that spell could use a better name.
I'll buy that. Magical Talent for a 1/day SLA with no failure chance. Good call Happler!
There is a "source of power" consideration. Arcane Dabbling gives arcane spells. Among other things, this makes them subject to arcane spell failure. I don't see any Orisons as overpowered, but I probably wouldn't want a Fighter to have Stabilize, for example.
Most of the prerequisites for crafting a magic item can be ignored by adding 5 to the Spellcraft DC for each prerequisite missing (although you still need the requisite item creation feat). Which reminds me... for the cost of a feat (Master Craftsman) ANYONE with 5 ranks in a Craft or Profession skill qualifies to take Craft Wondrous Item or Craft Magic Arms and Armor. Yup... the Fighter can make his own +1 Keen Scimitar.
Did you mean use-activated Dispel Magic? Not at all. For one thing, if you had Dispel Magic you wouldn't need to disarm the magic - you could dispel it. For another, it would be FAR more expensive (30,100 use-activated, or 12,100 2/day).
Lawful Evil can be driven by their own code. *shrug* Here's what the Core says (I shall massively snip for brevity and to succinctly address the topic at hand): Law Versus Chaos Lawful characters... respect authority...
Following your own code is Chaotic. Following the code of a structured organization (like the church or the mafia) may also be Lawful in addition to the Lawfulness of obeying the laws of a government. The question is whether you follow your conscience or or whether you subject yourself to a higher authority, obeying even when that authority makes decisions with which you do not agree.
Lawful Evil no more defies law than a Lawful Good character. There is nothing inherently evil in lawbreaking, just something inherently lawless(chaotic).In the mind of a paladin, the edicts of an arbitrary and capricious tyrant are chaotic evil. An authority is to be respected only if they are ethically legitimate. I suppose the first thing i should say is that I don't understand how that is a response to me saying that Lawful Evil characters wouldn't act like Chaotic Good ones. I never said anything about how a Paladin views the world. Having said that, I'm clueless as to why a Paladin would see a Lawfully Evil empire as Chaotic Evil. He'd oppose either. I suppose it's that dump stat of 7 leaving him too stupid to differentiate law from chaos? I think of a Paladin as more Superman than Judge Dredd, personally, but YMMV.
Seems like you're trying to turn Lawful Evil into Chaotic Good. Lawful Evil no more defies law than a Lawful Good character. There is nothing inherently evil in lawbreaking, just something inherently lawless(chaotic).
Most performances no longer require the Bard to actually, you know, perform. I just learned that here, today.
Just remember you lose the training on the previous one. True - but pretty irrelevant after level 6 and rarely crippling even before. Let's add: Identify just gives a bonus to Spellcraft checks
It would cost the same as a Maximize Metamagic Rod, 7,000 gp (lesser), 27,000 gp (normal), 60,750 gp (greater).
|