HappyGoblin's page

During my last session a level one character wanted to craft Crossbow Bolt, Fire (CBF) (ideally many) using existing crossbow bolts and some stolen bed linens. The kicker is that we all acknowledged that these would be "improvised" CBFs with the normal -4 penalty.

Normally, a single bolt costs 50 gold. I had absolutely no idea how to adjust that value for improvised bolts. Main question: Is there any kind of RAW or clear RAI for this?

Context - how I handled it in the moment
Ultimately I was far more generous than the rules allow, yet my player still balked at her slow progress. I allowed her to roll once per hour, and she rolled pretty high (I forget the exact total) on her first try; and so I simply hand-waved the monetary calculation and said that she could, with an hour's effort, create one. The idea of her character sitting there and wrapping linen around existing bolts and needing an hour to make one didn't sit well with her, but I stuck to the decision, reasoning that doing this in a way that wouldn't stop the bolt as it departed the crossbow would be difficult.

I'm kind of guessing that there's no clear answer here. RAW and RAI are preferred, but in their absence I'll take any useful suggestions for next time.

...

But if it's a "pre-combat stealth up to the mook" scenario, then things change a bit, because he cannot Ready an Action out of combat. But you would start a Surprise Round instead.

In a pre-combat stealth scenario, he would be able to say "DM, if the Frost Giant moves, I want to attack him" and then if/when the Frost Giant moves, an Attack of Opportunity is provoked and is immediately resolved, a Surprise Round would begin the exact second that the AoO takes place, so everyone would then roll Initiative, and every PC/mook who is aware of enemies gets to act during this Surprise Round and the Rogue would ostensibly be able to act as well. ...

I have never understood attacks of opportunity to be something a character can make outside of combat. This seems to be against RAW and RAI, and seems like a way to try to double up on the number of attacks an ambusher can make in a surprise round.

"At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed. ... A flat-footed character can’t make attacks of opportunity, unless he has the Combat Reflexes feat."

Unless we're saying that characters outside of combat can make AOOs, then they briefly lose that ability at the start of combat only to gain it again on their first turns; it seems like the default state here is flat-footed and acting in combat removes that default state.

Even if AOOs outside of combat are allowed, no surprise round would occur. If Alice AOOs Bob then Bob becomes aware of Alice in that very moment, combat begins, and it begins with both characters aware of one another. Alice's player can't claim a surprise round just because Bob wasn't aware of her until she hit him. He's aware now, at the Initiative roll, and that means no surprise round occurs.

Oh huh. Somehow I never noticed that Deliquescent Gloves applied to held weapons! I stand corrected on that point!

The RAW answer has already been pretty well stated, but there was some discussion about the fluff behind the RAW and I'll point out that it's not as clear-cut as "you touch if you hit touch AC but miss normal AC". Specifically, a rolled attack that misses doesn't mean you swung and missed or swung and hit armor, it more accurately means you didn't hit.

In a real battle, if your enemy is covered in plate mail then you might not wildly swing, hoping to somehow penetrate and deal damage. Moreso with some weapons than others, you would spend time trying to angle and aim for the perfect strike. A given attack roll that misses due to the enemy's armor could absolutely mean you hit armor once. It could also represent a flurry of many light blows, none of which pierced armor. It could mean you were trying to angle for that perfect strike and never found your opening, so you simply never swung or lunged. It could even mean that while you were angling you telegraphed your move too much and your enemy dodged, creating a situation in which they dodged when they otherwise wouldn't have, specifically due to their heavy armor.

This all goes to the point that the rules are abstract, not designed to micromanage these details. They're concerned with macroscopic outcomes. Therefore, it may be ill-advised to try to describe outcomes based on assumed details which were not part of the game design, your PC's builds, or ultimately the dice rolls prior to your interpretation.

No. Deliquescent Gloves add 1d6 acid damage only to an unarmed strike or natural attack, not under any other circumstances. Both "unarmed strike" and "natural attack" are well-defined terms.

A natural attack is an attack with a natural weapon. The natural weapon would be explicitly listed in a creature's stat blocks. A creature with a natural weapon can make other attacks, not using the natural weapon, but such other attacks are not "natural attacks".

Unarmed strikes are melee attacks made with no weapon at all, for the purpose of dealing damage, and not falling in the list of exceptions (such as a monk's Improved Unarmed Strike, which counts as armed).

A kinetic blast does not use a natural weapon, so it is not a natural attack. A kinetic blast is ranged, so it is not an unarmed strike. Additionally, it is well-understood that spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural effects that are aimed and deal damage are not unarmed attacks. The magic is itself the weapon.

AoN version

Given the italicization*...

...

*Note: d20pfsrd's transcript doesn't include the italicization, but it is present in my printed copy and on Archives of Nethys. I repeat the usual caution against using that site for definitive rule-parsing.

Oh! I had no idea that the spells were actually italicized in the original text. I checked my copy of the Advanced Player Guide and indeed they are. On d20pfsrd light isn't, but daylight is, and it's hyperlinked to that spell's page. Nonetheless, I've become so accustomed to errant links on that site which appear to be added algorithmically that I simply ignored that link. This is very good support for your answer!

Alas, not quite what I was hoping to hear, at least in terms of RAW and RAI. Your note that a house rule might allow this is well-taken, but my DM and I usually try to stick to the RAI unless broken or nonsensical.

Thanks!

Some necromancy here as I was just recently encountering something that, with a template, gains a LESSER version of fast healing.

There are some golems with fast healing 10 or 15 that gains fast healing 5 from shield golem template.

theres maybe one or two cases, a minority, where shield golem would give them fast healing if there was no stacking.

So, why? this all leads me to believe it indeed stacks using the logic DarkWolf presented.

That's not strictly accurate. I think you're referring to the "Shield Guardian" (SG) template. The language for an SG is not that they *gain* Fast Healing (FH) 5, it's that they *have* FH 5. "A shield guardian has fast healing 5."

In the strictest technical sense, this should actually *reduce* the FH of a golem that has FH 10, such as an Admamantine Golem (AG). Templates override normal stat blocks, either by a delta "reduce size one level" or by an overwrite "type becomes undead". In this case it is not described as a delta, it is a statement of a fixed value, and therefore it should set FH to exactly the value stated, 5.

However, a reasonable DM would be within her rights to suggest that the RAI was certainly not to reduce FH, and therefore let the AG SG keep FH 10.

It is not, however, RAW to assume that this is an increase of FH by 5, and therefore should total FH 15, nor is it as clear cut that that is the RAI. At that point it's venturing into DM fiat.

First post. If I mess something up then please let me know.

Warrior of the Holy Light is a paladin archetype: https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/paladin/archetypes/paizo-pala din-archetypes/warrior-of-the-holy-light

One class ability it grants is "Power of Faith". This power creates a "nimbus of light" which confers various effects to allies, and at level 12 "...is treated as daylight for the purposes of affecting creatures with sensitivity to light" (note that "daylight" here is lowercase and does not seem to reference the spell of the same name).

However, the power never explicitly states that it provides illumination. In contrast, various other class features and spells state that they provide illumination. For example, Divine Bond (on a weapon) states "...causes the weapon to shed light as a torch", which is a well-defined amount of illumination providing "normal" light.

I am interested in both RAW and RAI. I have three questions about this power, all closely related to one another:
1: Does this power provide any illumination at all?
2: If so, how much illumination does it provide at level 4?
3: If so, how much illumination does it provide at level 12?

Although I think that my questions are well-defined and useful without context, I'll share the impetus for asking:
Yesterday my level 18 Warrior of Light fought a Night Wing which used Deeper Darkness. I used my Power of Faith to create the nimbus, and at the time quickly scanned the text, saw "daylight", and thought that it created bright light. I told my DM "bright light" was normal for the nimbus, and trusting my answer she rolled with that. Bright light plus Deeper Darkness equals dim light, so that's how we played it. However, after the session I re-read the power and realized that it never actually says it illuminates as daylight. Worried that I abused my power, I confessed to the DM and now I'm trying to determine the RAW and RAI answers.