_Ozy_'s page

Does it work?

Readied Action:

The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun.

Lunge:

You can increase the reach of your melee attacks by 5 feet until the end of your turn by taking a –2 penalty to your AC until your next turn.

The wielder can use the rod up to three times per day to augment her casting of a conjuration (summoning) spell, causing all of her summoned creatures to gain the giant simple template.

So, other than boosting your SMI-IX up in size, what other interesting things can you do?

This would work on a Mount spell...so Huge horse that lasts for hours.

If you're a summoner, Summon Eidolon qualifiers, so now your normally large eidolon starts out huge and can be 'enlarged' to gargantuan.

Summon Swarm/Insect plaque/Vomit swarm...I have no idea what happens. Swarm becomes larger? Each individual creature becomes larger? How does it affect swarm stats and damage?

Mad Monkeys? same as above?

Any other interesting shenanigans?

In order to clarify some issues, I thought I would get opinions as to what the rules say regarding the use of free actions (and swift actions) after full attack actions.

According to the rules, as I understand them, free actions can be taken before, during, or after other actions, including full attack actions.

Which of the following examples, if any, would be illegal, and why?

Let's assume the DM doesn't impose a restriction on the number of FA (free actions). Assume a Magus character. In each case, the FA, or SW (swift action) is supposed to take place after the designated full-attack action.

1) TWF(unarmed strike + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword)

2) TWF(unarmed strike + longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)

3) Spell Combat(shield + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword)

4) Spell Combat(shield + longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)

5) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)

6) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)

7) Spell Combat(shocking grasp + longsword) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack) + FA(change grip to 1-hand longsword) + SW(quickened shocking grasp) + FA(change grip to 2-hand longsword) + FA(spellstrike attack)

Thanks.

Is a Ring of Wizardry any benefit to an Alchemist with the Spell Knowledge discovery?

Spell Knowledge:

Select a single spell from the sorcerer/wizard spell list that is at least 2 levels lower than your highest-level extract known. You can prepare and cast this spell as an arcane spell. Preparing the spell uses up an extract slot 1 level higher than the spell's level.

Ring of Wizardry:

The wearer’s arcane spells per day are doubled for one specific spell level.

Any effect? I doubt it would double extract slots in general. Maybe allow two spell casting per extract slot used? Maybe nothing?

The item is listed with a CL8.

From the item:

the caster of the divination must succeed on a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) against a DC of 19 (as if the wearer had cast nondetection on herself ).

From nondetection:

If a divination is attempted against the warded creature or item, the caster of the divination must succeed on a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) against a DC of 11 + the caster level of the spellcaster who cast nondetection. If you cast nondetection on yourself or on an item currently in your possession, the DC is 15 + your caster level.

Looks like the item uses the wrong base DC 11, instead of 15. The correct DC for the amulet should be 23.

So, in musing about some old threads regarding the Ring of Invisibility I came up with a question regarding another recent FAQ.

We're told that the 'as a spell' part of the ring of invisibility means that the item acts like the spell when activated, including duration, which requires command word re-activation every 3 minutes.

Does this also interact with the FAQ regarding visible manifestations of spells and spell-like abilities:

Whatever the case, these manifestations are obviously magic of some kind, even to the uninitiated; this prevents spellcasters that use spell-like abilities, psychic magic, and the like from running completely amok against non-spellcasters in a non-combat situation.

Does this mean that using command word activated items, such as a Ring of Invisibility or a Hat of Disguise, will display a visible and obviously magical effect?

I searched and didn't see that this was asked before. Some relevant text from the spell:

You create a rolling sphere of churning water that can engulf those it strikes...

They gain cover against attacks from outside the aqueous orb but are considered entangled by its churning currents...

It calls out two conditions:

Entangled

The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) or lose the spell.

Engulf (Ex)

The creature can engulf creatures in its path as part of a standard action. It cannot make other attacks during a round in which it engulfs. The creature merely has to move over its opponents, affecting as many as it can cover. Targeted creatures can make attacks of opportunity against the creature, but if they do so, they are not entitled to a saving throw against the engulf attack. Those who do not attempt attacks of opportunity can attempt a Reflex save to avoid being engulfed—on a success, they are pushed back or aside (target’s choice) as the creature moves forward. Engulfed opponents gain the pinned condition, are in danger of suffocating, are trapped within the creature’s body until they are no longer pinned, and may be subject to other special attacks from the creature. The save DC is Strength-based.

So, does the 'engulfed' in the spell description actually refer to the engulf ability, or is it just descriptive fluff?

Furthermore, if creatures are just entangled, can they attack a foe outside from within an aqueous orb? They get cover from outside attacks, is the cover just 1-way, or would any opponents attacked by the engulfed creature also gain cover? If they can attack, do they get any further penalties for attacking while 'under water'?

Just how literally do people take RAW vs. RAI?

A literal reading of the Hexcrafter, by RAW, doesn't work.

Hex Magus (Su)

At 4th level, the hexcrafter magus gains access to a small number of witch’s hexes. The hexcrafter magus picks one hex from the witch’s hex class feature. He gains the benefit of or uses that hex as if he were a witch of a level equal to his magus level.

This feature replaces spell recall.

No problem right? Works just like how people think it works. Yup, it does, for that one particular hex you get at 4th level. The other hexes you get? Not so much:

Hex Arcana

A hexcrafter gains access to the following magus arcana, or may select any witch hex in place of a magus arcana. At 12th level, the hexcrafter may select a hex or major hex in place of a magus arcana. At 18th level, a hexcrafter can select a hex, major hex, or grand hex in place of a magus arcana. He cannot select any hex or arcana more than once.

Note, unlike the Hex Magus ability, there is absolutely no language in the Hex arcana ability to suggest that the magus is treated as a witch to gain the benefit of the hexes, so all of the 'witch specific' class and levels language wouldn't apply.

That's the literal RAW translation. It's also obviously bonkers. And yet, I see the same argument used for things like the Swashbuckler precise strike ability gained through Flamboyant Arcana.

So my question: is stupidly literal RAW still RAW, or is there any room to add even the remotest of common sense and context to a RAW interpretation. Or does that automatically become RAI?