Search Posts
No it has not, and yes english is a second language...porque usar y aplicar no son lo mismo en mi idioma, pueden ser sinonimos pero no son lo mismo. Quizas por eso me confundi. Pero gracias por la ayuda.
And by the way in this system a Free Action is still an action, but who cares. An aura its not an action is a permanent effect, it says so in the monster core. A monster's aura automatically affects everything within a specified emanation around that monster. The monster doesn't need to spend actions on the aura; rather, the aura's effects are applied at specific times, such as when a creature ends its turn within the aura or when creatures enter the aura. If an aura does nothing but deal damage, its entry lists only the radius, damage, and saving throw. Such auras deal this damage to a creature when the creature enters the aura and when a creature starts its turn in the aura. A creature can take damage from the aura only once per round. The GM might determine that a monster's aura doesn't affect its own allies. For example, a creature might be immune to a monster's frightful presence if they have been around each other for a long time. But like I said, case closed, it works like it works.
Actually no, but it's ok, I don't want any particular ruling, I actually only care to understand how it works with things that are not uses and definitely are more things like applications. If the trigger would have said apply instead of use, I would have no quarrel with it. But nah, it is what it is, they choose to go with that word instead of the other. And again my problem is that the auras are not something that the monster can control, its something that is there and acts on its own, the monster cannot shut it down or do nothing with it. Look at this ability, its an aura and the graveknight doesn't have the option to not do it, it happens automatically, so its not something that he uses on you, but ok, I get what you all say, and going to the dictionary is not bad, it gives clarity but what the hell do I know about it. After all if there was a mistake they would have done an errata about it so nah, there you go... Sacrilegious Aura (aura, divine, void) 30 feet. When a creature in the aura uses a vitality spell or ability, the graveknight automatically attempts to counteract it, with the listed counteract modifier.
Then why the aura entry in the Monster Core says this?: A monster's aura automatically affects everything within a specified emanation around that monster. The monster doesn't need to spend actions on the aura; rather, the aura's effects are applied at specific times, such as when a creature ends its turn within the aura or when creatures enter the aura. If an aura does nothing but deal damage, its entry lists only the radius, damage, and saving throw. Such auras deal this damage to a creature when the creature enters the aura and when a creature starts its turn in the aura. A creature can take damage from the aura only once per round. The GM might determine that a monster's aura doesn't affect its own allies. For example, a creature might be immune to a monster's frightful presence if they have been around each other for a long time. I seem to think that this spell for the level of it and the fact that it doesn't even have heighten, only would trigger for things that are actions against you...and for the straightforward language, that is correct for the most part, but this triggers its not that straightforward... Use - 1. take, hold, or deploy (something) as a means of accomplishing or achieving something; employ.
In this case I believe they made a mistake, its not that straightforward and they should correct it.
But when it says "uses", states that there is an action and auras are emanations that continually ebbs out from you, you are not using anything. If that were the case it would say something like "when you are affected by a mental effect", instead of "a creature that you can see uses a mental effect against you". For me the wording it's completely wrong for the trigger and doesn't seem very clear. Using implies an action and that's the problem with that. But I'll take that into consideration.
Does the reaction from Mind of Menace triggers when the character with mind of menace enters an aura of Frightful Presence? In my opinion it doesn't since an aura is not targeted and is not an action, but I have a player that seems to think it does...who can help me here?
Can you move diagonally next to a wall? My understanding of the rules is that it depends on the object. If the object fills the entire space or not. What do you think guys?
I don't understand the difference between these two. Unless the purpose of one is to be able to place talismans on it and the other runes. It seems to me that these two items weren't well thought. Because if the Explorer's Clothes can have talismans as well as runes, then the Bracers will be pointless, and if the difference is that the Bracers can have talismans and the clothes don't, then why list the clothes as armor? Can someone help me understand this?
The problem is not with the Elemental, there's an enemy in one of the Adventure Path, that have the same ability (Scarlet Triad Sniper), so I assume as much, but got into a discussion about movement and the move trait. And that was my doubt...
The ability Swiftness states: Swiftness The elemental’s movement doesn’t trigger reactions. Is Stand, which has the "Move" trait, considered movement? or is just when you actually using one of your movement types such as: flying, stride, climb, swim, burrow, or fall?
But I mean suppose that you start your round and you don't declare Power Attack, then your round gets by and later before your other round starts you get an AoO, could you declare Power Attack on the AoO???
Ok and in the case of someone making a ready action to attack the monster once it closes on you, I suppose the AoO and the ready action would mean that the player would get two attacks at no penalty, right? The other thing I wanted to ask, could you do Power Attack in an AoO?
It sounds reasonable, but as you said it's better if you go core Ranger... And in the case that Tarantula is mentioning, always would be better if you go core, as damage is done on Str, and in fact you're saving one feat slot, not going High Dex (you would have to attack with Weapon Finesse)... So I don't see the point on building a PC that has to have at least 15 of Dex to gain TWF and then go with at least 15 of Str, to have enough Str to hit regularly... So I don't see the point on that option, as well as the other option the Urban Ranger...but that's another topic...thanks mates !!! hope someday that they realize that if you are going to make an option at least the option should be as deadly as the others...(take the Inquisitor for example, that's one hell of a broken class)...
Question, if your are using a Shield for Bashing and you dont have the TWF feat, would you take the -6/-10 negative for attacking with two weapons???...if so then answer me this, why would anyone use the Sword & Shield option of the Ranger found on the APH??? |
