RathJinx's page

@_@???

Where does it says "you only need 1 hand for further grapple checks"???

Sorry about taking so long to get back to you, I've been pretty busy lately.

In the Combat section of the prd it only describes a penalty for not using 2 hands in making the initial grapple check. The check they refer to for this is the one that causes both the grappler and grapplee to gain the grappled condition, they refer to this check as 'attempting to grapple a foe'. Attempting to grapple a foe is different than maintaining a grapple. When it comes to maintaining the grapple or using a grapple check to escape a grapple they don't describe any sort of extra penalty for the grapple check based on the number of free hands you have.

As a standard action, you can attempt to grapple a foe, hindering his combat options. If you do not have Improved Grapple, grab, or a similar ability, attempting to grapple a foe provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver. Humanoid creatures without two free hands attempting to grapple a foe take a –4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll.

For a more comprehensive breakdown of Grapple that illustrates this see Understanding grappling

Yes, the Dan Bong sucks.

I am sorry.

You're way too quick to judge.

The dan bong only sucks for the first grapple check, once you have them in a grapple you only need 1 hand for further grapple checks (and you get a further +5 bonus on those checks).

A simple houserule could address this oversight, as the weapon is described as something that was designed to improve your grapple some would negate the penalty for not having both hands free.

Sometimes the DM may houserule that heirloom weapons can be exotic. It may just mean that it isn't something that you can automatically gain proficiency in, due to its exotic nature. It's uniqueness is all the more reason to pass it down from generation to generation anyways. That or make it transformative.

The one thing I want to know is if enhancement bonuses add to this check as a special case, considering it's specially designed to suit this purpose.

Yes, it provides you cover, but it doesn't assume you are *facing* any particular direction; it just assumes that you have planted the shield in a particular location and are hiding behind it.

You can plant the shield on the west side of your square and still perceive things that are happening east of you. A rogue wouldn't get sneak attack just for striking from the opposite side of where your tower shield is.

What about the AC bonus for your shield?

Ultimate Equipment: Armor: Armor and Shields table wrote:

4 A tower shield can instead grant you cover. See the description.

and

Ultimate Equipment: Armor: Tower Shield wrote:

In most situations, it provides the indicated shield bonus to your AC. As a standard action, however, you can use a tower shield to grant you total cover until the beginning of your next turn. When using a tower shield in this way, you must choose one edge of your space. That edge is treated as a solid wall for attacks targeting you only. You gain total cover for attacks that pass through this edge and no cover for attacks that do not pass through this edge (see cover). The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding. You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else.

Oladon wrote:

Ssalarn wrote:

What's up with the sudden round of thread necros lately?

I suspect it has to do with the current bug wherein the forums sometimes load older pages instead of the newest... but that's still no excuse.

I've my fingers crossed that it's use of the search feature.

I looked it up specifically because I wanted to know. Next time I'll look at the date, though I don't feel they answered the question fully anyways.

Heh, when I was visiting the site I recalled that we forgot to discuss this last night and thought in my head it would be good to bring up here, and lo and behold, you were way ahead of me!

The reasoning I was going to bring up follows along with Howie's above, and a specific from page 180 that "You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally." Contrast that with the skinny on immediate actions shortly after (indicating they make be done out of turn) and the specific exemption for speaking and you've got the base I was going to work off of for disallowing dropping items or going prone out of turn (unless forced due to being knocked out / killed).

I figure anyone should be able to drop prone as a free action at any point during anyone's turn (perhaps an immediate action) before an attack roll has been made against them. (once an attack is made however your reaction time isn't good enough to judge whether or not dropping prone will allow you to dodge the attack) You have plenty of time in which to drop prone during anyone else's turn. Especially if you can see them take a move action to draw a bow or to move into position. If a player makes a habit of doing this I would have them roll perception or sense motive. If you do this, your dm might have monsters start doing this too though.

Free actions don't take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn. Free actions rarely incur attacks of opportunity. Some common free actions are described below.

Troubleshooter wrote:

You can benefit from Total Cover* while using a tower shield. That's the closest thing I can think of.

And even that's not really about facing. A tower shield is basically a portable wall that you can put down wherever you want. The cover is granted because the shield is positioned between you and your attacker, not because you're facing a particular way. You can set your shield and still be completely aware of everything in a 360-degree arc.

4 A tower shield can instead grant you cover. See the description.

and

In most situations, it provides the indicated shield bonus to your AC. As a standard action, however, you can use a tower shield to grant you total cover until the beginning of your next turn. When using a tower shield in this way, you must choose one edge of your space. That edge is treated as a solid wall for attacks targeting you only. You gain total cover for attacks that pass through this edge and no cover for attacks that do not pass through this edge (see cover). The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding. You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else.

This seems to imply that when you use your tower shield for cover it either negates your shield bonus to AC or it only provides you with a shield bonus according to facing rules. I believe the latter is true as the shield adopts a facing when used this way. At all other times, your character is assumed to be moving, circling, shielding and dodging on the spot while everyone else is taking their turn.

I had that problem a few years ago which inspired me to make this Marching Order document. It represents the standard marching order of the PCs on the grid, so at any point I need to know who is affected by what prior to combat beginning, I can reference the chart.

Each player's name is set next to a letter on the legend, and in each grid section, the letter represents the player's position.

They can change the order, obviously, but unless they do, this is the default. It has worked great and was well-received by my players. If you use it, I suggest using pencil or laminating it and using dry erase markers.

Additionally, for weapons drawn or otherwise, I took a 1 inch wooden dowel and cut it into 3 inch segments. One half is painted green, one half is painted red. Each PC receives one and with green side up, their weapons are drawn, red side up they're sheathed. The player may, at any time outside of combat, before initiative is called for, change their readiness.

Hope that helps.

Brilliant.

RathJinx, you appear to be glossing over the fact that I already said that via RAW this is allowed. I stated that it was my BELIEF that it was not allowed by RAI. So, what was your point? To agree with me on the RAW? Ok, you agree with me on the RAW. Well done.

So back to RAI, I believe that it is not the intent that you can use the same hand to both attack and then benefit from the AC of the shield on that hand unless you have special abilities that state you do.

- Gauss

If you couldn't do this they would have specified this in the same chapter as the following

I addressed the RAI as well, though not nearly in as much detail.

Also there is the fact that you can do this with a regular shield and 2H weapon just by making a standard action attack, then dropping it and using a move action to don your shield. This potentiality as taken entirely from the combat section supports RAI for using your off-hand weapon then donning a shield and gaining its shield bonus.

I disagree with your interpretation that the ruling is due to decreased size or inherent design. It is more likely that it is due to 'you used that hand already'.

In general if you use a hand for something you probably cannot use it for something else.

Since you have already used the hand to attack the intent seems to be that you forgo it's ability to do something else.

- Gauss

You can use your hands as much as you want, it doesn't restrict the actions you do with them later except in the specific case of a buckler or a shield bash. The thing about the buckler is that it straps to your forearm but when you attack with that arm or cast a spell the thing awkwardly twists out of position on your forearm. It's still strapped to you when you attack with it (like any shield bash) It takes about a round to readjust your buckler properly.

Donning a shield you are directly strapping the shield to yourself, without having awkwardly twisted the thing beforehand. Hence the uniqueness of the buckler and the usability of shields after attacking with the same arm prior to donning the shield.

You could even do this before with a regular shield as a move action (or a free action combined with a move action with BAB +1).

Standard action: 2H weapon attack
No action: let go of 2H weapon with 1 hand and just hold it
Move action: draw your shield knowing that you now need it.

If you couldn't do this they would have specified this in the same chapter as the following

Ready or Drop a Shield

Strapping a shield to your arm to gain its shield bonus to your AC, or unstrapping and dropping a shield so you can use your shield hand for another purpose, requires a move action. If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you can ready or drop a shield as a free action combined with a regular move.

Notice the shield just outright grants a shield bonus to AC when you strap it on.

When using a specific shield for a shield bash you lose its AC bonus until next turn. They refer to the specific shield's AC bonus instead of to 'your shield bonus to AC'.

If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn. An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

This also means that there is nothing preventing you from

I would even argue that you could unstrap, readjust then strap your shield on again to regain it's usage for the turn at the cost of a move action with a free action as explained above. If you take off the straps you aren't wielding it anymore, you might consider that it ceases to become 'your shield' in the short period of time it isn't being wielded. The real problem with that is that you haven't technically 'dropped' your shield.

There may be people arguing that you do not get your shield bonus to AC if you do this because you used that hand to attack during this round (at least to me the FAQ on THW + Armor Spikes strongly suggests that this may be RAI)

Do you have the quote or link for this? Armor spikes don't grant a shield bonus to AC.

I don't like how perception gives everyone 360 degrees of total awareness. If someone is on a rooftop (out of combat) and no one mentions they look up, I don't want to hand out a perception check to notice them. Same thing with being followed.

The rolling of a d20 often represents a combination of things. For perception it represents level of attentiveness, luck, facing, observation to detail, blind spots (i.e. overhanging branches) and the combined use of all of their senses.

If they happen to be generally facing the wrong way as they walk you can give them a circumstantial penalty, especially if their hearing or other relevant senses are impaired. If they are forced to look the wrong way you should definitely give them a penalty. i.e. being tied up, scanning ahead from the front of the formation. They can gain a circumstantial bonus or penalty if they specify that they are looking all around them as opposed to scanning a specific area. If they suspect the enemy will come from one direction, they can gain a bonus for scanning that area primarily.

My other issues are when people "search a room" and expect it covers going over everything with a fine tooth comb.

How much detail are you giving them about the room? If you didn't say the rooms rafters were extensive, among other things, you can expect their search roll to cover anything that a character could think of looking at. Having just seen an enemy drop from the rafters would essentially give them the idea to check the spot where the enemy was hiding without necessarily climbing up (i.e. a brief ground level scan). Looting after a battle doesn't just mean searching the bodies, it means searching the areas that you know they could have dropped something. The randomness factor of a d20 roll takes this into account, as well as luck. Just give them a circ. penalty or bonus based on describe an added focus to the areas in question. If one rolls high enough on their search describe the room again to them and mention that something seems out of place as they look around or that they might see a glint of metal or something. Make them do an intelligence check if you have to (i.e. they think that glint was just a nail).

RAW, it works. RAI, I would extend the bucklers limitation that if you attack with that hand you cannot use the quickdraw shield for that round.

- Gauss

I would argue that that defeats the purpose of the quickdraw shield. A buckler is also smaller and can't be used to defend for the round if you attack with it. This ruling is unique to the buckler due to it's decreased size or inherent design. Nothing in the quickdraw shield description ever says that you can't fire the bow or swing with the 2H sword you were already wielding, hold it in one hand and quickdraw your QD shield to defend. You won't even be able to make an AoO if you do this unless you drop your weapon entirely and quickdraw a 1H weapon at the same time as your shield. Why impose even further penalties? Dropping your main weapon or forfeiting your ability to make AoO's is already bad enough.

A monk of 4 winds gets elemental fist at 1st (not normally available til 11th), loses stunning fist(which can be replaced at 11th), and keeps flurry of blows.

A normal monk who takes dragon style keeps stunning fist, can get elemental fist for a single energy type at 7th, and then at 11th gets the full effects of elemental fist, and has flurry of blows.

So, either way, you don't get the full benefits of both until level 11, and getting elemental fist early costs you 2 feats (which i concede most str based monks like to take anyways) but means your feats at 3(dragon style), 5(dragon ferocity), 7(elemental fist), are set. If you want Dragon Roar (which is a decent AoE and debuff), add 9th level feat also set.

A good analysis but the idea of bypassing the feat requirements wasn't really the part I was concerned about. I'm fine with the idea of waiting until I meet the prerequisites.

If you want to take full advantage of the 4 feats in question at the point where you actually fulfill all of the requirements the monk of the four winds is still at a disadvantage over any other monk.

This is because

A monk with this feat can use Elemental Fist as if he were a monk of the four winds

Meaning he basically gains the effects of the class feature elemental fist in addition to the feat. However, a monk of the four winds already has this class feature. My argument is that this must have been an oversight and they should likewise be able to take this feat path to gain the benefits of the stunning fist class feature.

Here are the relevant quotes for the class features in question

At 5th level, and every five levels thereafter, the monk increases the damage of his Elemental Fist by 1d6 (2d6 at 5th level, 3d6 at 10th level, and so on).

At 4th level, and every 4 levels thereafter, the monk gains the ability to apply a new condition to the target of his Stunning Fist.

The RAW for dragon ferocity means that a regular monk has the potential to better fill the niche that the archetype 'Monk of the Four Winds' was originally intended for. A normal monk can apply extra conditions to his targets and gains the same amount of extra damage, a 4W monk can only ever stun for 1 round.

p.s. if you use downtime to retrain feats (as explained in Ultimate Campaign) a monk of the four winds can actually get can dragon ferocity a short time after reaching lvl 9 instead. A regular monk can also qualify for their elemental fist that they took at lvl 7 by lvl 9.

If I may piggyback a bit here, does this work for all of the moves that replace stunning fist? Like if I was a normal monk and grabbed elemental fist would I be able to use it more, just not get the increased damage? Or if I take Perfect strike, can I use it once per monk level per day?

You need to follow the feat description. Elemental fist says a monk has uses per day equal to monk level plus 1 per 4 levels other than monk but only 1d6 extra damage. If you want the extra elemental fist damage as a regular monk you need the dragon ferocity feat. (dragon style rocks by the way)

Any monk gets the same number of uses when they take perfect strike.

So a regular monk with dragon ferocity can gain the full benefits of elemental fist but a monk of the four winds can't gain the full benefits of stunning fist. Which is kind of lame if you are like me and you prefer the monk of the four winds build and like the dragon style feats.

Of course you could convince your GM to houserule that a monk of the four winds with dragon ferocity can use stunning fist as a regular monk would, maybe with a little extra downtime training.

see Errata or houserule Dragon Ferocity for a Monk of the Four Winds

Seems like an oversight to me or an unnecessary penalty that an actual Monk of the Four Winds doesn't benefit fully from taking the Dragon Ferocity.

Special: Taking this feat allows you to qualify for the Elemental Fist feat (Advanced Player's Guide 158) even if you do not meet that feat's prerequisites. If you do not meet that feat's prerequisites, you must choose one of the damage types that feat offers, and you can use only that damage type with your Elemental Fist attacks until you meet the feat's normal prerequisites. A monk with this feat can use Elemental Fist as if he were a monk of the four winds (Advanced Player's Guide 112).

In other words a regular monk with dragon ferocity can gain the full benefits of elemental fist but a monk of the four winds can't gain the full benefits of stunning fist. I recognize that stunning fist is a pre-requisite for the ability. If, however, you've already qualified for and taken stunning fist as a Monk of 4W, it seems fair and unbroken to me that they could gain the same benefits from stunning fist. As it is, they have to wait until they get BAB of +8 for stunning fist which is penalty enough on it's own.

As things stand, you would have to convince your GM to let this work. Can this be errata'd under the Dragon Ferocity description? (Or under the Monk of 4W archetype replacement effect part of the elemental fist description?)

The free action used to stow your shield and the free action used to draw it again may conflict. RAW, you can use any number of free actions a turn subject to DM discretion. In other words, if you seem to be abusing the unlimited free actions rule he can veto it. In my game he accepted my suggestion that you can either draw or stow your QD shield as a free action but not both.

My friends felt I was abusing it to use a 2H weapon and shield, but our houseruled limitation leaves it workable and fair. Another limitation is that your 2H weapon generally can't be used on AoO between turns if you have your shield up and your shield can't help when you provoke an AoO.

The other actions appear fine to me, though I haven't looked them up.