Korwynne's page

Thanks for the advice! I was waffling over the rogue only because of the trap/skills benefit, but I think you'd talked me out of it.

Just a Mort: I'd love variant channeling, but we're playing a Core/Advanced Player Guide rules only.

Re: Selective Channel - I had initially taken Command Undead, going on the gamble that I'd primarily use my negative channel to command undead or heal undead. I guess in fighting against a low-level zombie horde, I may be fairly useless... so it may help yet to get selective channel.

I have decided to go with a negative energy cleric, am level 3, and am trying to decide how to proceed in the future.

So far, he's been effective with sneak/obscuring mist/channel negative. He has also the Command Undead feat. Much to the party's dismay, he has not chosen Selective Channel (yet).

I built him with a high dex and low str, so he's good with a crossbow or at range, but not so great hand-to-hand. He tries to use negative energy channel when first entering a fight, directly after using obscuring mist to 'outline' the deadliness. Sneak and darkvision have been helpful here (being a half-orc). I've been wondering lately if I should possibly also take a rank in rogue...

Reasons for it:
1) Our party doesn't have a rogue,
2) With undead at his command, it could create flanking opportunities,
3) Invisibility + sneak can be very effective for this character.

Reasons not for it:
1) I'd delay my cleric progression,
2) I can't see any use for backstab, unless I can use it with touch-melee combat and cause wounds spells.

So primarily I'm curious on your thoughts about rogueing out... followed by any additional thoughts on progression for this build.

Thanks in advance!

I have decided to go with a negative energy cleric, am level 3, and am trying to decide how to proceed in the future.

So far, he's been effective with sneak/obscuring mist/channel negative. He has also the Command Undead feat. Much to the party's dismay, he has not chosen Selective Channel (yet).

I built him with a high dex and low str, so he's good with a crossbow or at range, but not so great hand-to-hand. He tries to use negative energy channel when first entering a fight, directly after using obscuring mist to 'outline' the deadliness. Sneak and darkvision have been helpful here (being a half-orc). I've been wondering lately if I should possibly also take a rank in rogue...

Reasons for it:
1) Our party doesn't have a rogue,
2) With undead at his command, it could create flanking opportunities,
3) Invisibility + sneak can be very effective for this character.

Reasons not for it:
1) I'd delay my cleric progression,
2) I can't see any use for backstab, unless I can use it with touch-melee combat and cause wounds spells.

So primarily I'm curious on your thoughts about rogueing out... followed by any additional thoughts on progression for this build.

Thanks in advance!

I have decided to go with a negative energy cleric, am level 3, and am trying to decide how to proceed in the future.

So far, he's been effective with sneak/obscuring mist/channel negative. He has also the Command Undead feat. Much to the party's dismay, he has not chosen Selective Channel (yet).

I built him with a high dex and low str, so he's good with a crossbow or at range, but not so great hand-to-hand. He tries to use negative energy channel when first entering a fight, directly after using obscuring mist to 'outline' the deadliness. Sneak and darkvision have been helpful here (being a half-orc). I've been wondering lately if I should possibly also take a rank in rogue...

Reasons for it:
1) Our party doesn't have a rogue,
2) With undead at his command, it could create flanking opportunities,
3) Invisibility + sneak can be very effective for this character.

Reasons not for it:
1) I'd delay my cleric progression,
2) I can't see any use for backstab, unless I can use it with touch-melee combat and cause wounds spells.

So primarily I'm curious on your thoughts about rogueing out... followed by any additional thoughts on progression for this build.

Thanks in advance!

An enemy Naga suggests to a PC with swim speed of 30':
"Congratulations, you have passed the test of bravery, now swim upstream where you will find my cave and can claim your prize."

The cave is 1 hour upstream, and it contains a few possessions.

If the enemy naga is killed by the rest of the party, is there a way to reverse the effects of the spell? Or does the party (who do not have swim speeds and would be pursuing in rough terrain) have to chase their missing member for an hour, or until he finds the cave to claim his reward?

Part 2, if a party member casts darkness on said PC, what would he do? Keep trying to go upstream, or be compelled to stop... until the darkness wears off?

Part 3, is this a reasonable use of suggestion?

Last question: Would it be outside the bounds of the suggestion to pause and further attack the naga while en route to the alleged treasure? Would it be outside of the bounds of suggestion to be convinced by the party to wait so they can all go together?

Essentially, but not exactly. The difference is player A does not have a legal square to move to (end in) when they declare their move. Based on some of the obstacle wording, a player makes no advancement if declaring such a move.

I agree it should be the same, but if following RAW, can a player intentionally declare a move that ends in an illegal square? I would say yes, since allies aren't obstacles.

A is holding the head of the corridor. B wants to swap places with A.

The simple way is for A to delay until just before B's initiative. A would five foot step into the empty space behind him, then B would move through A's space into contact with X. But what if B is already adjacent ?

*
X*********
XABC***
X*********
*

B could ready an action to five foot step up when A has left his square. A performs a withdraw action, moving through ally B's space to the space behind B. B's readied action interrupts A's withdrawal and B steps up into the square vacated by A. A completes his withdraw by moving up to the space vacated by B. Again, the cost is that A didn't get to do anything except his withdraw action.

And what about here, where A has no free spaces? Would you allow A to declare a move action to (and from) illegal square B is occupying? B has a readied

You can't stand in a prone player's square, just a helpless player's square, so can a player voluntarily drop limp and go helpless?

In going helpless, they can't crawl until the next round.

Squeeze rules don't allow ending in another player's square.

Given it is turn-based, RAW, it seems there's no legal way to swap.

Im running a campaign filled with 5 ft wide tunnels that dead end with an illusion of an enemy, where the party is then surprised by enemies approaching from a secret door they missed.

No, not really, but it's an annoying thing to know in realilty I could dos y dos with someone, but in combat I can't get around RAW.

Okay, so a follow-up to this... First, what's the benefit of swap places, and what are the limitations?

Benefit: Whenever you are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat, you can move into your ally's square as part of normal movement. At the same time, your ally moves into your previous space as an immediate action.

So does this mean, if you have a line of 4 allies, all with this feat, that the guy in back could move to the front of the line in one move action? It says "as part of normal movement", so #4 would swap with #3, then #2, then #1, and end up in front. Could there be empty spaces between allies, such that you'd move 30', some of which would be swaps? That's how I read it, which makes it fairly strong as a feat and really useful with a large phalanx of organized soldiers.

Secondly, without the feat, how many rounds, at minimum, would the same procedure take?

Suppose for simplifying sake, we have 4 players in a dead-end 5-foot wide cave with a low ceiling (no climbing allowed, but not a squeeze cave). The mouth of the cave is swarmed by enemies. The fighter of the group is in the very back. Not one PC has swap places, as a feat. Technically, for any one player, there are no legal places to move to.

This is where I'm thinking, player 2nd-to-rear (#3) readies an action to move 5' as soon as player #4 moves out of his square. This would be a readied standard move, not a 5' step since it involves coordination with the ally. Player #4 says, "Hey, I got no legal squares to move to, but I'm going to move forward through the line of allies, and... if a spot opens up, I'll take it, otherwise, I'll move back to my original square."

So here's where question #1 comes up:
Can a player take a move action that starts and ends in their own square. Meaning, can a player move 10' forward through allies, then 10' back, into his own legal square. Or, similar to with obstacles, if there's not legal square to move into, he'd technically not be moving at all, nixing the whole thing and never truly moving from his own square?

Alright, so part 2:
Does player #4 still have a standard or move action now that they've advanced 5' and had their original square taken? If so could player #2 have declared a similar readied action? Supposing this is true, then player #4 pops over into player #2's square, then player #2 fills in to old player #3's spot. (end of round 1)

Round 2:
Similar situation with player #1, where they declare the readied action to move back 5', provided the opportunity arises and player #4 pops into player #1's square. Player #1 and player #4 expose themselves to AoO's since they are both moving through threatened squares and neither is a 5' step. I'm saying this because player #4, while only ENTERING a threatened square initially would declare his move to go forward, then back... but due to player #1's readied action, would be forced to stand still in the new spot. Now player #4 has made it into the lead spot and can still perform a move or standard action. Player #2 took his readied action, which again, I'd rule as not a 5' step and would be out of actions until the next round.

Is this a fair interpretation of the rules? It takes 1.5 rounds to get to the front of the pack, from the back, if no teamwork feats have been taken. Further, player #1 is stuck in the lead spot, in combat for up to 2 rounds and is open to AoO's. And finally, all who take readied actions are losing their standard action for the rounds they did so.

Another option would be for player #1 to delay to just before player #4's turn, at which point they'd drop prone and intentionally go 'helpless' so that player #4 could occupy his square. This would open him to full-round coup de gratis actions should the enemy deem it worthwhile. That would get player #4 to the front in 1 round, but expose #4 to AoO's and c'd'g' attempts until they decided to get up or crawl, exposing them to a 2nd round of AoO's.

Is there a better way? Should I disallow swapping places without the feat altogether? Can a player take an intended move action forward and back through allies even if a legal square is not available? In other words, if I say, "I'm going to tap Bob on the shoulder then return to my original square, the original square being my only legal option", do I actually move?

Yes, that sounds like a very fun time. Maybe that's the real reason Michone first chopped her zombies arms off... Thanks!

Undead are immune to compulsions, which is the noun version of compel. I would go along with an argument that you couldn't wrangle the sword from Zombo, master of dance, if it's a 'sticky' cursed item, but per above I'd think he'd still not have the sense to "use" it. His slam attack would remain unaffected?... I mean unless its a Ramero Land of the Dead blue collar mechanic zombie who learns to use simple weapons.

I guess it's a gm call, both in crafting the weapon as sticky vs compulsion only, and in identifying if zombies would forego slams for an improvised weapon attack...

I guess the more important question here is:
If the bard in my group manages to put cursed boots of dancing on a zombie, do I get Thriller? Or no Thriller?

Coridan wrote:

So the tidewater cutlass allows a hydraulic push with a whopping +1 CMB? Kind of underwhelming.

Looks like +3 to me (CL is listed as 3rd). Still underwhelming, but on a crowded ship, even against CMD 15(ish) of low level characters you`ve got a 45% chance of putting someone in the drink (to be eaten by sharks or at least out of the action for a couple rounds).

Are there railings on the ship? I had initially thought, trying to bull-rush an enemy off the ship would give a +5 to CMD. Instead, I could assume there are no obstacles to push off... If I did that, it would make the cutlass more useful.

Got it. Yeah, this is for a neutral/chaotic party so potentially an ally situation. The goal was to have the zombie NOT weilding the weapon, and instead have it sheated and an item available for steal attempts. Along with a number of mundane items (a bell, a jug, some chalk...). I just wanted to make sure cursed items that compel users to wear/use them would not apply in the case of undead. Otherwise, then I'd still have it on the zombie but only a available for disarm attempts. Thanks for the thoroughness of reply!

I guess also, as a PC with undead, it would be easier to loot questionable dungeons via ordering a zombie around instead of taking the risk him or herself mid-dungeon crawl.

Evil cleric with channel negative energy - envy, from ultimate magic. He has an undead under his control with several mundane and cursed items hanging from its belt. Would that work?

If there was no back line, the front liner could take a 5 foot step away without drawing any attacks of opportunity. Isn't that true?

That said, I appreciate the feedback and maybe that's a fair trade-off. The 5 foot step away would be treated as a move action instead.

For a 5 foot step, unless moving through enemy squares, would an attack of opportunity exist? In this case, front liner would 5 foot step away, back liner would five foot step into a threatened square. Neither would be traveling through multiple threatened squares.

For a cursed longsword, the description points out the user must weild the sword over other chosen weapons. If a zombie is ordered to pick up a cursed weapon, would they too be compelled to use it? Undead traits say zombies are immune to certain mid-affecting magic, including compulsions. I can't really tell what magic a cursed item uses. Other than curse effects associated with removing or dropping certain cursed items, would zombies be immune to specific negative affects of cursed items? For purposes of discussion, how would a zombie handle a -2 longsword? Need to use it over other weapons, per the description? Still able to specifically not weild any weapon and rely on their own body slam attack, while keeping it in inventory?

I guess my gut reaction would be, unless instructed to weild a weapon, the zombie would just keep it sheathed. If instructed by an undead command to weild, the sword would wind up the weapon they happen to be using. Is that a fair interpretation?

If two characters are side by side in battle - one wants to move to the other's square and vice versa. Neither has the "swap places (teamwork)" feat. Would they be able to trade places via sacrificing initiative and taking 5-foot steps? I know with movement you need to move to an unoccupied square, but with a readied or delayed action could the movement be considered synchronized such that they aren't landing in occupied squares?

I know of the swap places feat - I don't want to minimize the value of this, and I don't think I am by allowing a coordinated trade positions. The way I see it, if a character is willing to give up place in initiative and use their movement, they should be able to coordinate with an ally. With swap places, the true gain is in getting that free immediate action instead of having to wait and also sacrifice movement.

I'd like to get thoughts on this. It seems minor, but want to be fair. In a game I'm running, there was debate about two NPCs attempting to trade places in this way. In the end, I just flipped one of the two into an adjacent unoccupied square. It was of minor consequence. Later on however, PCs or enemies, I think if a front line and second line of fighters want to switch places during combat via coordinated 5 foot steps, I'd like to allow it if the rules don't flat out contradict it.

Ahhh, good point. I was also thinking from the standpoint that there are higher-level fog spells where you pick your point of origin (they don't need to equal where you're currently standing). Thanks for the feedback.

My latest thought:

A spellcaster passes a stealth check to enter a room - remaining at the edges of a room and unnoticed by an enemy (the caster is either invisible or in darkness).

The caster then wants to cast "obscuring mist" - a non-offensive spell that creates a mist that emanates from the caster's position. This is a standard action and the PC has silent spell, but does not have quicken spell as a feat.

For casting the spell, should the caster roll another stealth check? If so, what modifier would apply?

For the enemy, the mist would be a clearly visible action. Would they notice it at the onset and therefore get any bonuses in pinpointing the caster's location?

Thanks in advance!

Thanks! Looks like I was overthinking it again - this is helpful!

An underwater-breathing PC grapples a high-level NPC in the ocean. In my game, I've allowed a 3rd dimension to the water (in that this PC can drag the grappled creature 'down' as a move action).

I have a couple questions, and would appreciate your thoughts:

1) There are no rules in RAW about swimming vertically 'down'. The player really wants to drag enemies as far down as he can while maintaining the grapple. The thought would be that he has swim speed, and it would make for a lot more efficient drowning if the bad guy takes more than 1 round to get to the surface. I am employing max depth rules- in the latest situation, he'd bottom out at 50' of water. For the swim ability (without a swim speed), the rules identify that you can move at 1/4 speed as a standard move action. I'd argue that a player should be able to swim 'up' faster than this (allowing the drownee to surface from a 50' depth in 2 to 3 rounds instead of 6 to 10 rounds). Is that a reasonable approach?

2) Per the rules on moving a creature while grappled:
"If you attempt to place your foe in a hazardous location, such as in a wall of fire or over a pit, the target receives a free attempt to break your grapple with a +4 bonus." Is underwater (threat of drowning) a hazardous location? Would the opposing creature then get -2 (dex mod) and a +4 (hazardous modifier) every round? These would both apply to the escape artist check?

3) Are there penalties to attempting to grapple/maintain grapples underwater? What about if this became a pin attempt?

Thanks!

Cool - well, I spilled the beans on this one too early. I made the player aware right away, when they put it on. Going forward, I'll play my cards a little closer to my chest. Thanks for the advice! Great stuff!

Thanks, that clears it up for me.

And since this item is not sticky, then removing the curse would make it a standard ring of feather fall.

So for role-play's sake:
If the item is not sticky, but when you put it on you apply a -4 DEX ability modifier, how noticeable would that be? What would be reasonable methods for the character to figure that out? Would the GM track the dex modifiers separately, or do you clue the player in above the table?

So, I guess I have two questions...
1) for specified cursed items outside of the cursed item creation tables, can I assume stickiness, if not elsewhere specified?, and
2) for the remove curse spell, is the wording a little too specific? It identifies only cursed armor, shields, and weapons as being sticky if you read it exactly.

That's the issue though - there's no 'stickiness' implied in the item description. A lot of the other items in the cursed items section explains the stickiness and what happens when remove curse is cast. This item doesn't spell it out.

And further, I had the description of Remove Curse sent to me:
"Success means the curse is removed. Remove curse does not remove the curse from a cursed shield, weapon, or suit of armor." If I made the call that it was sticky, I could get player push-back.

I'm new to GM'ing and I tossed a cursed ring into the adventure. Now I'm trying to identify the best way to play it out. A party member was rewarded with a ring of clumsiness after a large battle in which he was poisoned and took massive damage (including Str damage as well).

The ring was identified by a party member as a ring of feather fall (passed the DC, but not by more than 10).

The player put the ring on. Assuming they catch no notion of trickery around how they acquired the ring in the first place...

1) Regarding the ring description, there's no mention of how to take the ring off. Once they figure out the damage is related to the ring, can they simply discard it? It seems like a lot of other cursed items specifically say "cannot be removed until..." or "need to cast remove curse to remove the item..." This item just states the affect and leaves it at that. On the flip side, there is a passage under cursed items that states: "While some cursed items can be simply be discarded, others force a compulsion on the user to keep them. Others reappear even if discarded or are impossible to throw away. A remove curse spell can allow the item to be discarded, but the curse reasserts itself if the item is used again."

If the item can simply be discarded, once identified...
2) The cursed item is the difference between two-weapon fighting and really clumsy non-two weapon proficient fighting for this character. Is it an easy lift to at least notice something is off the next fight they get into? Or the next Dex-based skill check? Would I just give an odds?

If the item cannot be discarded and a remove curse is used...
3) This is a specific cursed item, that does both feather fall, and -4 to dex and 20% arcane spell failure. Some items, when remove curse is cast, will revert to the intended original magical item from which the item was crafted. In the text for the remove curse spell, it states if the DC is met, the curse is removed (except for cursed shields, weapons, and suits of armor). By "curse is removed", does that
a) mean the wearer can remove the cursed item this round, or
b) mean the cursed item is no longer cursed, and now is a ring of feather fall, or
c) mean that the cursed item is no longer cursed and is now a ring with no magical properties at all?

I think the way I want to play it is:
1) The PC knows the ring is cursed. I can't imagine what losing 4 points to an ability score would actually feel like, but I can't imagine not feeling *something*. Also, the NPCs that provided the ring are still around and have never been allies of the group. If not immediate, a series of sense motive checks should identify the curse in relatively short time... right?

2) The ring cannot be removed. If I'm going to let the dex damage be noticed (immediately), it doesn't make sense that the ring can simply be discarded. Per the rules of removing cursed items, it can either force a compulsion, or the ring keeps coming back, or it's impossible to throw away, or it's easy to throw away... It seems like this leaves a little discretion in crafting cursed items for a gaming situation. When I initially rolled for the ring in setting up the game and read the description, I assumed specified cursed items were of a more devious nature than common cursed items.

3) When remove curse is cast successfully, I'll allow the curse to be removed, transforming the ring into a ring of feather fall.

That isn't quite RAW, but I feel like I'm not a good enough GM to play out "figuring out the ring is cursed" without a lot of meta-gaming taking place. I'd love to hear other takes or feedback around this item. It seems like the description of either "specified cursed items", this specific ring's description, or the "remove curse" spell, could've used a little more explanation.

The way I read the rules as written:
1) The ring is not initially identifiable.

2) Once identified as causing the effect, it can be removed and discarded at the will of the player.

3) Remove curse = the curse is completely removed, transforming the ring into simply a ring of feather fall...

... although I couldn't really tell if the ring could also just be a cursed item, in which case remove curse would allow it to be removed, but it'd pass on the same curse if it's ever worn again. Getting back to the remove curse spell, it seems fairly limiting that ALL items EXCEPT armor, shields, and weapons would be de-cursed with 1 successful remove spell.

Thanks in advance - I look forward to any feedback or similar experiences with cursed loot as GMs or as PCs.

Thanks!

Thanks! Any idea on what feats might?

Spell Penetration says: "Gain a +2 bonus on caster level checks (1d20 + caster level) made to overcome a creature's spell resistance."

If someone were to have a cursed item where the save when casting "remove curse" is 10 + caster level of that item, would spell penetration help?

If not, is there any feat that would assist in the situation where a person is looking to reduce the roll necessary to remove cursed items?

Long-time player, first time GM. I had a fun circumstance arise.

I have a changeling on board who wanted to try to buddy up with Plugg. She cast "sow thought" on him. He failed his will save. I asked what thought she was sowing? "I pose no threat to you."

Seriously? Could the spell be any more appropriate? Anyway, she ended up being 'rewarded' for that by replacing Caulky in getting the cushy job of food tasting on board (still sleeping down with the crew, as Plugg didn't have the authority to kick Caulky out of her room). Caulky then felt threatened and hired 3 thugs to beat the PC while she slept. After spending the next day figuring out who paid who to do what, realizing it was Caulky and she still wasn't safe, the PC slept in the crow's nest. She was then visited by a visage of the ship's sorcerer and told to report to Plugg at once.

When she arrived, there was a tall figure waiting outside who said, "Please, don't harm the body."
She walked in and found Caulky tied up and Plugg grinning - "I got you a present. She's all yours."

The PC went from being on a revenge mission to kill Caulky, to feeling completely turned around - having to save face and kill a defenseless Caulky in cold blood in front of Plugg. And as for harming the body, she elected to slice her neck slowly, ear-to-ear.

The next day, Caulky arrived on deck again as a zombie, being guided by the tall figure from before.

Things have been a little rocky since- and Plugg and Scourge hate all the other PCs in the party... NPCs hate the witch. And now I feel like I'm trying to plan out an HBO drama.

Thanks!

That was nice and straightforward; I appreciate it.

I'm setting up a new character/familiar and have a couple questions:

1) Can a witch get a Thrush at 1st level? It seems like it should be an option... Similar to a raven, except +3 diplomacy instead of +3 appraise.

2) With a thrush, how do I calculate the attack?
Step 1 - use the master's BAB (+0)
Step 2 - according to the Wizard section of Core, a familiar's attack will be the highest of STR and DEX modifiers. Thrush has STR = 1 (-5) and DEX = 15 (+2). Do I use the dex?
Step 3 - Thrush = size diminutive, so do I also get a +4 on the attack for size bonus?

I guess my concerns are around Step 2, where it doesn't specifically say the new familiar has weapon finesse with his natural weapon (his beak), and his build actually shows a -1 for attacks (+0-5+4).

And secondly, in the Wizard portion of Core, it doesn't state specifically anything about using or not using size modifier on attacks.

And finally, for size dim. creatures, if the thrush attacks:
a) at level 3 will I be able to use the same stats for its natural attack as I'd use for delivering a touch attack? Would it still be against the opponent's touch AC? I saw once a comment about creature's natural attacks having to go against regular, not touch, AC when delivering a spell, but couldn't find the reference.

b) for a size dim. creature, if it attacks, it has to enter the enemy's square; so does this mean, the enemy would always get an attack of opportunity against it? Entering and leaving the square?

Thanks in advance!

Slightly off this topic, what happens when you cast magic weapon on a basic longbow?

If facing off with a creature where only magical weapons do damage, does the bow then infuse the arrows with magic, or does magic weapon only add +1 to hit, while the arrows are plain arrows doing nonmagical damage?