Asuna's page

Asuna wrote:

I had another question. This came up at a game I was playing in, and I was curious. Another player used the readied-action trigger "opponent performs a standard action." I raised the point that I didn't think that was a legal trigger. Looking back, I'm not sure about it because I'm not seeing anything RAW that specifically dis-includes a metagame trigger like that. My thoughts are thus:

- there is no visual cue for "a standard action" that is necessarily recognizable; any trigger cues are tied to types of actions
- many things that are normally standard actions can also be other action types (quickened spells, full attack actions, etc.), so some visual cues that could be argued don't work
- there are standard actions that, it could easily be argued, wouldn't have recognizable cues (lowering spell resistance, some extraordinary abilities, etc.)
- assuming that "or statements" are frowned upon (a point the other player raised), saying "a standard action" is essentially a giant "or statement" (opponent performs action a, b, d, f, g, or y)

Any thoughts on such a situation? I personally wouldn't allow any trigger that the character (not player) can't describe in words, with a possible restriction on the extent of complex triggers, but I'm curious if anybody knows of anything in the rules about guidelines/restrictions for triggers that might be pertinent.

Hmmm. The rules are not against the metaplay description. You can even ready an action betwen, to say so, the 2nd and the 3rd attac of a full round attack. The problem is that the readied action must be described in some way, and the player is nearly forced to use the game mechanics terms. I always allow the players (not the pc) to ready an action using the game terms, it's really more clear than a readied action with an "in character speaking", even for me as DM. For sure you can say that "opponent performs a standard action" is too much generic or indefinite to trigger, it's your right.

I'd disagree that the players are forced to use the game mechanics terms except that using them makes it easier to describe. But there's usually a way for the character to describe it even then. Using your example, "I want to attack and interrupt after the second attack in his set, before the third one." And yes, the ability for the character to describe it is absolutely house-rule and metagame descriptors are not explicitly ruled against that I've seen, but it does seem to be against intent that you can say "a standard action" when that encompasses so many different potential triggers that you may not even be able to perceive.

There's legitimate reason to have a readied action against multiple targets. Say the party has just finished taking out a party of baddie minions, and the martial is covering the minions with his bow while the cleric heals up the rogue and the wizard examines loot. Martial's Readied Action: "I shoot the first minion that takes an action to promote escape." Any of the minions try to run, or to attack, he shoots. He still has to make the attack roll, so it's easy to say that if he missed it's because his attention was on a different person at the time. Also, circumstance bonuses and soft cover.

I had another question. This came up at a game I was playing in, and I was curious. Another player used the readied-action trigger "opponent performs a standard action." I raised the point that I didn't think that was a legal trigger. Looking back, I'm not sure about it because I'm not seeing anything RAW that specifically dis-includes a metagame trigger like that. My thoughts are thus:

- there is no visual cue for "a standard action" that is necessarily recognizable; any trigger cues are tied to types of actions
- many things that are normally standard actions can also be other action types (quickened spells, full attack actions, etc.), so some visual cues that could be argued don't work
- there are standard actions that, it could easily be argued, wouldn't have recognizable cues (lowering spell resistance, some extraordinary abilities, etc.)
- assuming that "or statements" are frowned upon (a point the other player raised), saying "a standard action" is essentially a giant "or statement" (opponent performs action a, b, d, f, g, or y)

Any thoughts on such a situation? I personally wouldn't allow any trigger that the character (not player) can't describe in words, with a possible restriction on the extent of complex triggers, but I'm curious if anybody knows of anything in the rules about guidelines/restrictions for triggers that might be pertinent.

For some people with trauma of that nature, confronting it in a controlled way can be part of the healing process. That can take the form of tabletop role-playing games for some. But, as with the veteran with PTSD, they have to be ready for it, and they have to know that that is what they're getting into.

The veteran might not knowingly go to a paintball range, but if his friends "kidnap" him in a good-natured way (say for a fun birthday) and take him to a paintball range, he didn't exactly know what was coming. Fault on the friends for putting him in that situation without informing him.

Likewise, for somebody unfamiliar with the particular system or with roleplaying games in general, they can't exactly be expected to read the entire rulebook and find out for themselves that the possibility for that exists. It's on the person who invited them and/or the GM to let them know that the game contains mature themes, including graphic violence, erotic situations, and sexual violence. A person can't make an informed decision to avoid being triggered by such things if s/he doesn't know it's possible. That's like expecting a person to choose to avoid driving over a broken bridge when there's no sign saying "Bridge is out."

The mature way to deal with rape/murder/torture in an RPG is to make sure that people are at least okay with the possibility of it happening. If somebody isn't, then you probably don't want to include it in sessions where that person is playing. From what the GM of this game said of himself, it sounds like he did do that, and that the OP may not have gotten the entire story. However, in a situation as described by the OP, it would be a case of the GM abusing power to override a character's natural inclination. Without actual mind control (ex: dominate person), a successful Diplomacy or Seduction check can only make one severely inclined to take an action. It can't make the action.

Edit: Ninjaed by Ximen Bao.

An AP that includes a section taking place in Urgir might be nice. A place where Orcs might be predominantly evil, but going about lives that are not dissimilar to those led by other races in other countries. Good people can't exactly go around killing a city just for being Orcs. That might be genocide, which most GMs would probably say is evil. :)

BB36, sounds like your Tolkienian Orcs are a little bit more LE. Unless they're militaristic in the sense of a ravening horde of zombies being an army, some militaristic organization would at least mean that some would slide in a Lawful direction.

I would like to see a bit more done with Orcs than just getting hit with the CE/Rapist/Raider stamp and sideboarded. If Goblins and Kobolds are the speed bump on the way to Level 2, then Orcs are definitely one of the next speed bumps in line right now. Even a larger LE group of Orcs that use different (read: non-Barbarian) tactics would be interesting. Speaking of . . .

Strolls off to see if that can be worked into the campaign.

@ Kegluneq: The benefit is getting to use any bonuses from special materials, enchantments, or damage types from multiple weapons. Ultimately, it's more costly to maintain those multiple weapons, but there's the benefit.

Reverting to the topic: I've seen a couple of convincing arguments from both sides. I've also seen a number of specious arguments on both sides. I'm going to attempt to sum what I see as the major supporting arguments of both sides up in an objective fashion below, but a close reading of the thread will reveal all points to a reader.

So far, neither of the two questions posed by this thread has been conclusively answered. Those two questions are as follows:

Asteldian Caliskan wrote:

If the Magus cannot hold a charge in his sword hand then that makes it pretty sucky.

There's two things there:

1) The proposal that a magus cannot hold a charge, at all, if he attempts to use Spellstrike to deliver the free attack granted as part of casting. (Top Post)

2) The idea that a touch spell must be held in specific place, like a hand, claw, teeth, (or sword) chosen at either the time of casting, or the time the charge becomes held. (This came up about halfway through the thread, and is not directly magus related, it would apply to any spellcaster using touch spells.)

That idea being annoying is why I was likening it to a body that is charged in reality. The charge is evenly spread across the entire body, and discharges from any encounter point between the charged body and the uncharged body. Trying to determine any kind of specific body part for the charge to be held in is needlessly complex.

That said, this interpretation would mean that if a Wizard was holding a Shocking Grasp charge at the end of battle, and he forgot to dismiss or discharge it before his buddy came up and slapped him on the back, then that spell would discharge into his buddy. I don't think that's a ridiculous thing to expect to happen, though. It even feels like RAI, and it is RAW as far as I know.

Addressing only the spell component pouch scenario part.

I will disagree about the casting of a new spell discharging the touch spell. It says that it causes it to dissipate, quite different. It does so without causing damage, thus the spell component pouch is safe. So, considering the dissipating charge versus the discharging charge, well, I don't think the order of events is relevant.

Part of why I say the order of events is actually relevant is because until you have met all the necessary requirements, you haven't cast the spell. That includes saying the words, making the appropriate gestures, and having the arcane focus and material components in hand. To get those last two items in hand, you would have to retrieve them. The act of retrieving them (which happens before you've finished casting the spell, which means before the touch spell is dissipated) is a deliberate touch with the hands, meaning the spell discharges before it can dissipate. Preparing material components is a free action, but it is still an action that requires a touch. That touch discharges the spell, meaning the spell discharges. That's part of why I say the order of events does matter.

I would request a response by Jo Bird to the issue of wands, rods, staves and bonded items.

Asuna wrote:

Jo Bird does raise a good point, though. The majority isn't always right. It just has the loudest voice. Else the world would still be flat, the sun would still go around the Earth, and the moon would still be made of cheese. :D

Ahem...

I once again stand corrected.

If the spell discharged into the Magus's weapon, then the magus wouldn't be able to use spellstrike. Ever. Nor would wizards be able to use wands, bonded objects, or metamagic rods while casting touch spells. Heck, you even brought up the argument of touching air (which you said was ridiculous, but you never quite said why).

I'd also point out that touch is used as a verb, as in to do something. It is the first thing you actively touch, once you have cast the spell. You don't discharge it into the ground, you don't discharge it into your weapon, you don't discharge it into the air. That simple.

If everyone else believes something is obvious, and you're the only one who disagrees. And all their way of doing things makes it work and yours doesn't. Well then, I think it should be obvious where the problem lies.

Jo Bird does raise a good point, though. The majority isn't always right. It just has the loudest voice. Else the world would still be flat, the sun would still go around the Earth, and the moon would still be made of cheese. :D

I do agree with your point of touch refers to an active verb, though, not a passive one. And certainly not a present progressive. I hate to sound like a broken record, but electricity. It discharges under very specific conditions if you've built up a charge.

I think it's valid to say that 'touching' means with your hands, as the definition typically implies. It's a real stretch to assume that touching is inclusive of your feet inside your boots.

As far as spell casting goes, using components is a part of the procedure to cast a spell, and casting another spell causes the touch spell to dissipate.

I don't understand why this is so difficult to understand.

I agree that using components is part of the procedure to cast a spell. To use components, though, you have to retrieve them. To retrieve them, you have to touch them (touch with your hands, generally). By your definition of touch with your hands, and since this is a (deliberate) touching of the item, the spell would discharge into the touched item. In some cases, that could be interpreted as discharging by activating, dealing whatever damage is appropriate to the item in question. I'm arguing order of operations here. We both agree the spell discharges. The question is when.

I also don't think "touch" is so narrow as to refer only to the hands. If I knee somebody in the crotch, I've certainly touched them. If I tap or nudge something with my foot, I've touched it. I don't see that as any different from touching something with my hand, except for the possibility of bare flesh being part of the contact. If bare flesh is required, then that raises two questions: does anything touching bare flesh cause discharge? If not, then does a Wizard wearing gloves have to remove his gloves to deliver a touch spell?

If he can't quote the Rules as Written, his interpretation can't possible be RAW. Plain and simple.

He did quote his rule. Most of us just believe that he's misinterpreting it because we believe his interpretation to be ridiculous.

"If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren't considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack normally doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge."

Emphasis added. Under his interpretation, I think it's not unreasonable to think that a touch spell discharges if you're wearing clothing or touching the ground.

Jo Bird wrote:

Frankly, you guys are the ones making wild assumptions, not me. Specifically, you're assuming that the damage dealing weapon in your hand does not count as something being touched. You have zero support from the RAW for that conclusion.

1) Remind me not to play a Magus in your game, as you are seriously nerfing the class.

2) When its 15+ people all with documented support against your ideas and none backing you, its pretty obvious who is making the wild assumptions. There have been documented, quoted sources from the rules, where as you have NOTHING quoted to support your arguments. Sorry. No one is telling you that you CANT run your games like this, only that its not RAW.

Or if it is RAW, the RAW are extremely stupid (spells discharging into your clothing, etc.).

@ Jo: Except to cast a spell, you must retrieve the material components first. Still, it's not unreasonable to assume that a spell doesn't dissipate into a sword for "Holding the Charge" if it also doesn't dissipate into your clothing, which it doesn't. If it did, then the rule wouldn't have been included in the first place. Take a look at the analogy I used earlier, likening "Holding the Charge" to the equivalent with electricity IRL.

@ Jarl: I stand corrected.

@ Jarl: I'm not seeing a contradiction between my quote/statement and yours. In Chill Touch, I'm not seeing anything that directly says it can be discharged over multiple rounds. I'm not seeing anything that directly says it doesn't, though, so I looked at my rule, which says it has to discharge over the course of one round. Perhaps it's implied or I'm misreading, though, so I'll yield partially.

Also, if touching "anything" discharged the spell, the previously mentioned point would apply. Touching your clothing, touching your pack, touching the wand in your hand that you used to cast the spell or the arcane-bonded item you have, would discharge the spell before you could use it. It makes a bit more sense to think that the spell knows your current state as you cast it, and so anything that you are currently touching does not count as a touched target. A touch attack brings something new in to the mix, discharging it.

It's like holding electrical charge in your body, and that analogy is directly prompted by the name of the ability. Try playing with it sometime if you can find somewhere/someone that has a Van de Graaff generator or a Violet Wand or something of the sort. You don't even discharge through the ground if you're insulated, which boots could do. You don't see a "discharge" until something new comes into the mix. In this case, the sword is in your hand while you're casting, so it's already conducting as part of you.

There seems to be a bit of confusion here between 'holding the charge' and the 'free' melee touch / weapon attack. You only get the 'free' attack part when you cast the spell, but that doesn't mean you can't keep holding the charge if you chose not to take that free attack for whatever reason, or simply miss with it.

For example, a Magus heading into a dungeon could cast shocking grasp, but not attack anything. Now he's holding the charge on the spell. As long as he's not the guy opening doors and the like, the first time he actually hits anything in melee combat he can discharge his shocking grasp spell via Spellstrike - note that he gets no 'free' attack to do so (that ship sailed back when he first cast the spell), but he does get to discharge his held spell.

Then there are the multi-touch spells like chill touch. Note that it has an instantaneous duration. That doesn't mean you have to make (or are even allowed to make) your level's worth of touch attacks in an instant. It means that you cast the spell, the effects of which are to make your hand glow blue, and to deliver the listed damage and effects to the first [level] number of things you touch... however long it may take you to touch that many things.

So, a Magus casts chill touch in combat when he's withing melee range of a bad guy. He gets to use Spellstrike to take the free melee touch attack he'd normally get as a weapon attack instead. Let's say he hits, and the spell discharges... once. He's (for argument's sake) a level 5 Magus, so he still has four more 'touches' left in the spell, so keeps swinging away, round after round, until he's scored four more hits and the spell's effect is completely done.

This is actually wrong. Once the touches start, they have to be completed in one round or the spell-casting is finished.

"Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch up to 6 willing targets as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell. If the spell allows you to touch targets over multiple rounds, touching 6 creatures is a full- round action."

Archivist is a Bard archetype from APG. I'd also like to submit myself for consideration for this one. I have Asuna (Variant Tiefling Cleric of Sarenrae, or several rebuild options), and I have a variety of other options I've been thinking about playing. I know you're looking for a Rogue-ly type. In addition to Asuna, the following are things I've been thinking about:

Hey, there. I'm interested in playing in a Carrion Crown PBP. I have some experience playing in other PBPs, and I'm running two as well. I have a few character concepts I can throw, including the profile I'm posting under. I currently have him listed using 20-point-buy, and as one of the variant Tiefling options listed in Bastards of Erebus. I also have what changes would be made were I to switch him to standard Tiefling, Tengu, and Changeling, all assuming 20-point-buy. I can also throw a few different character ideas out, including:

Thanks, Shadowlord. So under a strict interpretation, it isn't RAW, it's a RAI according to the FAQ. Not arguing with the interpretation, just clarifying. If I ever try to use the tricks in the future, I want to know what people might argue. The FAQ question also doesn't seem to address HiPS specifically, but I can see how they connect. Admittedly haven't had time to read the HiPS link.

Amenhotep is right about one thing, though. The Shadowdancer's version of HiPS is very easy to defeat.

lrichter wrote:

I just find it very disappointing that a cool class I have lots of cool memories of can no longer be played as it once was

Funny cause I think shadowdancers work just fine in pathfinder. I don't see the problem you are having with it.

...

-James

I think she was referring to the Ninja class, actually.

I have a couple of questions on this myself, actually. Just to clarify something that confused me slightly, about the Spring/Sneak Attack question. Since you have to de-Stealth, as it were, to make the attack, does that prevent you from using Sneak Attack, since the character is no longer under Stealth?

I'm also not seeing anything in the Sneak Attack feature or in the Stealth skill that specifically states that you can Sneak Attack if you are under Stealth. Sneak Attack seems fairly clear on the subject.

The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target.

It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging.

If you combine that with the description of the Stealth skill, it would seem like it wouldn't be possible to Sneak Attack at all while under Stealth, barring the Sniping exception in combination with the Sneak Attack distance rule. Could somebody point me to where it states that successfully entering Stealth allows any kind of melee attack whatsoever? I just went through the entire PF Core rulebook (Search function FTW) and found exactly 0 references to that being the case. I also found no references to a character being flat-footed to something unobserved, such as a character under Stealth.

So, to re-state my questions:

1) Does leaving Stealth to make your attack allow you to make a Sneak Attack at all? (Not a general attack, but specifically to make a Sneak Attack)
2) Where does it state that a Sneak Attack can be made while still under Stealth? (Excluding the Sniping exception)
3) Where does it state that not observing a threat makes the character flat-footed to that threat? (The only way I can see a Stealth/Sneak Attack combo working outside of the Sniping exception)

Honestly, I think that being able to Spring Attack/Sneak Attack would be cool. I have a Rogue character I was thinking about taking down the Spring Attack tree, so I'd love to be able to do it. I'm just not quite seeing the support for the maneuver. I agree with most of the claims that were made during this, but a lot of them seem based on a particular warrant - that being under Stealth permits a Sneak Attack, and I'm not seeing any backing for that warrant.

Curses. Well, it happens. Thanks for the consideration.

Anybody else in here interested in DM-ing a Carrion Crown with some of the folks who were rejected?

Hey, there. I'm interested in going in on this one. Here's an application for Asuna, Tiefling Cleric of Sarenrae. One, question, though. His stats were crafted using the Asura-spawn Tiefling variant from Bastards of Erebus (+2 Dex/Wis, -2 Int). The variant-Tiefling section also allows for variant racial features. His Darkness SLA is swapped for the See in Darkness ability possessed by Devils, and as far as physical features he's scaled and has a reptilian tail. Are the Tiefling variants permitted? If not, I can re-spec Asuna as a Tiefling or switch the character to be a Tengu or Changeling. I've included abbreviated views of what the changes would do in the profile. The background would be roughly the same, however. The character was written for a different part of Ustalav, so it wouldn't be too difficult to adapt it. I would need to add some material in to connect to Professor Lorrimor.

Traits: Flame of the Dawnflower, Chance Savior
Feat: Selective Channel
Race: Variant Tiefling
Class: Cleric (Sarenrae)

Actually, I'm shifting from the Cleric to the Fighter, per GM preference. Truth be told, she's the one I actually want to play more.

Thank you for accepting me into this. Which of my two characters should I be preparing for this one? I have the Tiefling Cleric (Sarenrae), or the Human Fighter. Would you need to look at the custom Tiefling rules before using one was allowed?

I have an idea that fell out of another campaign that I could throw in. The above character sheet is re-worked for Second Darkness. It's an alternate Tiefling based on the custom-Tiefling rules in Bastards of Erebus. Asura-bloodline, so mods are +2 Dex/Wis, -2 Int.

The Scouting For Fiends trait explains in part why Asuna might be in Riddleport. I could adjust his history so that he's a member of a local branch of the church of Sarenrae.

Alternately, I have an idea for a character that I haven't fully paged out yet. A Human Fighter who's currently on hiatus from the (Korvosan?) Guard Academy, and has made her way to Riddleport to get work as a mercenary while she's waiting for her hearing to go through. She started out in a street gang, then earned her way into the Academy through a fighting tournament. She managed to conceal that she was female until she hit puberty, and then she was temporarily relieved while they decided if she was allowed to continue. The justification was that she had lied about her gender. She's gotten used to being tough and playing male, and she takes offense at people who treat her as a soft female. Her weapon of choice is the Urumi, something of a cross between a whip and a longsword. Stats would be: Str 18, Dex 15, Con 13, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 8. Campaign trait would be Looking For Work. I'd prefer to run this character instead of Asuna, if I'm considered.

Ah. I didn't realize that there were other healers. Sounds like I'll bow out of this one. Perhaps next time. Still, I hope the campaign goes well. It seems like a fun one. If you're ever looking to run it again in future, I'd be interested in joining. Good luck, everybody.

Hey. My apologies for disappearing without a trace. Circumstances took me cross-country to a place with no Internet unexpectedly, and then into the hospital. I've only managed to check back now. Based on how far behind I seem to be, I'm guessing I'm out? I'll check back here later this evening to see.

Turning back to the man on the bench, and holding up a finger to the others, "One more question, lad, and then the captain can have one of his guards escort you home. Does your Tatyana have any truly unique identifying marks that we could use to verify that the corpse upstairs is or is not your lady fair?"

"Thank you, captain. Perhaps you could have a word with the guard outside?" He nods toward the boy, then the door.

After the guard leaves, or in Infernal if he doesn't. "Should we show the boy the body in situ, or should we wait until it has been cleaned up slightly and separated from the rest of the crime scene?"

"There is always the chance that it isn't her. It's not as if she's the only Aasimar in the country, after all. If two Tieflings can end up at the same table in a tavern by chance, then it's certainly possible that two Aasimar could be in the same building when one of them dies."

Standing, turning to face toward his companions while thinking out loud. "You said she was alone when she got here. Did your familiar stay and keep watch on her? What did she do after arriving?"

Sense Motive: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (20) + 4 = 24

"Ah. That does explain a great deal. But even a wizard such as yourself can't be expected to be all-knowing. The future is difficult to predict, even for the gods. You can't be expected to act as if you know the future with certainty." Asuna indicates to the guard to fetch another cup of ale, as it seems to be helping.

"Just as a thought, though. What makes you certain that she is the dead woman who was referred to by the guard? There are other women at the inn, and it is entirely possible that your loved one escaped harm, especially if she has powers as you say. Perhaps she came here to see somebody else, and has already left to continue her other business?"

Diplomacy for Gather Info or Influence, if necessary: 1d20 + 6 ⇒ (13) + 6 = 19

"When did you see her? How do you know she came to this place?"

Off-topic, I find it hilarious that he's seeking/taking comfort from the most monstrous character in the room. Horns, glowing eyes, red scales and a frakking tail? Clearly having good Charisma is worth something. :)

Looking at the guard, "Maybe he shouldn't have hit you, that's true. He will answer for that. But you didn't answer one of my questions. What makes you think the 'she' that he mentioned was your Tatyana?"

Especially one with a prestigious gig at the Opera House as one of the up-and-coming young stars?

Bluff: 1d20 + 2 ⇒ (2) + 2 = 4
Perception: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (11) + 4 = 15
Sense Motive: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (17) + 4 = 21

Casting a look in the direction of the others, Asuna tosses a few questions to the boy. "Hm. To start with, tell us about yourself. What do you do? How do you know Tatyana? How long have you two been engaged? Why do you think she's here? Who told you she was dead?"

Shrugging to Rautha, Asuna follows Dominic downstairs.

Asuna follows Dominic to the boy. "Perhaps you can let us know why you came. I can assure you, there are worse fates than simply answering a few questions. Now, is there anything that you'd like to tell us?

He helps the boy to his feet and leads him to a seat where he tends to the knock on the boy's head. "Come up here, lad. Let me take a look at that."

Guidance Diplomacy: 1d20 + 7 ⇒ (8) + 7 = 15
Heal Check: 1d20 + 8 ⇒ (8) + 8 = 16

Those happen to be useful ingredients for making a Flying Ointment. Just a thought.

Perception: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (4) + 4 = 8

Turning to Dominic and Rautha. "So, should we follow our tall friend, or shall we pursue this mysterious person over the rooftops into the night?"

"And as much as we can about the ambassador himself. If he was involved in any sort of underhanded activities, that may lead us to potential culprits. While my ideas are admittedly far-fetched, they do reflect the state of our current knowledge. I only meant to point out that if we find anything that indicates to the contrary of those points, we shouldn't rule it out."

Asuna will cast Guidance on as many skill checks as possible, and Aid Another where he can. If only he had the Blood Biography spell. :(

"As a possible solution your first problem, Dominic, what if this was not, as you put it, a double murder but two separate murders?"

Asuna walks around, pausing in places to illustrate his hypothesis but being careful not to actually disturb things. "Say the ambassador and this young woman had been having an affair. They come back to the Inn to do their deeds. The ambassador tells the woman that they have to break it off, and she gets angry. As he is lying on the bed, she comes up behind him and slits his throat. As she is surveying her work, a third person enters the room, sees what has happened, and mauls the girl. Perhaps this person already bears a grudge against the girl, perhaps it was business with the ambassador, perhaps it was business with both of them. For whatever reason, for the purpose of this hypothetical, this third person flies into a rage and takes it out on the girl. As this third person calms down, he/she realizes that there's a possibility of discovery and takes steps to minimize that possibility in reasonably cold blood."

Asuna thinks to himself for a minute, then ticks off on his fingers. "Assumptions we may be making that perhaps we shouldn't. First, that the murders were both committed by the same person. Second, that the person managed to enter and leave the building unnoticed, or even at all. Third, that there was a crime of passion involved in this mess. Fourth, that both of these corpses are the result of murder. Fifth, that both of these corpses are of who we have been told they are."

Finished with his list and his talking for the moment, Asuna clasps his hands behind his back and waits for his companions to comment on what he has said.

We've just barely reached X-mas Eve here. Yet another gray X-mas. No snow to speak of, just lots of clouds and probably some rain. Curse you, temperate Mediterranean climate!!!

Asuna, also not wanting to wait to deal with the body, moves to assist Dominic in any way he can for the examination of the corpse. He would murmur a blessing and sign the Dawnflower over Dominic to grant him a small boon in his efforts. In particular, he would look to see if the vocal apparatus is even vaguely intact.

Heal Aid Another: 1d20 + 9 ⇒ (12) + 9 = 21
Also, cast Guidance on Dominic to assist in his rolls. +1, but potentially worth it.

Following the examination of the corpse, Asuna would examine the remainder of the room, and then check the body in the wardrobe to see what happened to her and again checking for an intact vocal apparatus. Before each action, he would murmur a small prayer to Sarenrae and sign the Dawnflower across his forehead.

Cast Guidance before each skill check.
Perception to examine the room, take 20 if possible. Take 10 if taking 20 is not allowed. +5 mod with Guidance. Otherwise: 1d20 + 5 ⇒ (2) + 5 = 7
Heal to examine the body in the wardrobe, take 20 if possible, 10 if 20 is not allowed. +10 mod with Guidance. Otherwise: 1d20 + 10 ⇒ (9) + 10 = 19

If either corpse has an intact vocal apparatus, Asuna would go to the nearest guard and strongly recommend they send for a higher-ranked priest who can speak with the souls of the departed (Cleric 5+ with Speak With Dead prepared).

Following the examination of the corpses, and of the room, Asuna says a prayer over each body for the well-being of that person's soul in the afterlife, then turns to Dominic, Kirk, and Rautha.

Asuna follows Dominic inside, trying to keep his mind on the work and not on the injustice of the treatment in store for the Sczarni.

Definitely fun. I'm seeing a lot of interesting roleplay in the future since our character's have very different philosophies.

"Agreed. Let us be off." Asuna climbs from the chair and exchanges formal bows with Fanalio, one faith to another.

Asuna, listening to his new comrades, nods at many of their questions. He then adds to Dominic's list, "Not just the specifics of the death, I think. Who had access to him and/or the place where he was killed? Who discovered the body? What is being done to keep track of these people, and to keep them quiet? What parts of the investigation have been done already? Has the corpse been questioned?"

Thinking for a moment before asking the question, Asuna poses his final query. "If we should, in the course of our investigations, come across something that you all would rather the agents of Caliphas not know, what do you expect us to do?"

Sense Motive on the Academic Masters, for the entire conversation: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (16) + 4 = 20

Addressing himself primarily to Boris Fanalio, Asuna asks, "You must forgive us, Masters and Mistress, but that can scarcely be the whole situation. Why must you suspect each other of being responsible? Why select students to investigate instead of allowing the agents of Prince Ordranti to do so? Why was the ambassador coming here? There is certainly more to the situation than simply that a man was killed and you cannot investigate yourselves."

Cast Detect Magic

If nothing odd comes up: Turn to the lead guard and say, "Thank you for the escort. Let's do it again sometime, shall we?" In Infernal, he would continue with a smile on his face. "Next time, I blindfold you, of course."

Asuna would then move to the door, stepping through first with hand on hilt if nobody else does.

Perhaps Rakson will meet us at our destination?

After shaking off the hands of the guards and checking to make sure all his gear is still in place, Asuna mutters just loud enough to be heard,

To the guard who understood Common, "We are to go inside?"

Sense Motive or Perception on pretender to notice: 1d20 + 4 ⇒ (12) + 4 = 16

Leading the way to the door, Asuna would say to the nearest of the Nightscarves, "I recommend you come back and try the Ragout sometime. It's excellent. I only wish I had a chance to finish it myself."

Standing and smiling to the officers, Asuna takes a last pull from the mug of mead, then tips a nod of gratitude to the inkeeper.