Search Posts
The reason I brought it up that one of the VTT contributors is doing a rewrite on damage display and I suggested some indicator to show reduced or increase damage for resistance and weakness, but without specifying actual values. But he said it's not in the PF2 books so it won't be done that way (as default).
Are there any rules or guides given to a GM in any of the Pathfinder 2e books as to what the GM should inform players of in regards to damage. For example, a player rolls damage and the GM records it. What do the players know about what just happened? Could they tell if the creature was resistant or has a weakness based on dealing the damage. Can the player tell if the creature is uninjured or near death? Or are these just nebulous ideas left the the GM to determine?
I can glean the basics just by looking at the monster stat blocks, but I'm interested in the fringe examples and where that info lies in the stat block. Having an official template would be nice.
What is the working mechanic behind Shifter's Foil? Why does the feat disrupt shapeshifters. Does the feat only work with spells or does it apply to only attacks either melee or magical? Does it apply to any damaging method? My thought is it applies to anything with an attack roll, but the flavor text could indicate it only applies to spells used by caster. So, in the first case Fireball would not disrupt but in the second case it would. Or do just it universally become a shapeshifter disruptor where any damage caused by you can disrupt a shifter? Shifter Foil: Your command of shapeshifting magic can disrupt similar effects in others.
Prerequisite: Knowledge (arcana) 5 ranks or Knowledge (nature) 5 ranks, ability to use any polymorph effect. Benefit: A creature you deal damage to has difficulty using or maintaining polymorph effects until the end your next turn. To use a polymorph effect it must make a concentration check (DC 15 + twice the level of the effect). If you deal damage to an opponent under a polymorph effect, that opponent must succeed at a Will saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Wisdom modifier) or be forced back to its original form. If you score a critical hit against such an opponent, no saving throw is allowed.
No. Moving through threatened squares only provokes once from each creature.
I also noticed there's no combat reflexes which makes sense if they want to reduce the number of attacks in a round.
It seems the modifier is added to a single roll if the space being tumbled through is threatened by multiple creatures. So, for that one square 15 + 2*1.5 (highest cr creature threatening square) + 2 + 2 (for the 2 cr 1 creatures) making that squares tumble check 22. Now if you succeed, then no more checks are needed for those 3 creatures for movement through threatened squares. If your path included threatened squares but only by one at a time then you would need to make an 18 check vs the cr2 (15+3) then the next threatened square is 19 vs the cr1 (15+1.5+2) and the next threatened square a 21 vs the last cr 1 (15+1.5+4). (I'm assuming you round up on DC checks)
Yes, it does seem that reach weapons are better in SF. Given that they removed iterative attacks, this seems like a simple gimme to clear up some confusion with reach weapons in PF.
I think as written, any nonlethal damage that doesn't bring you to 0 HP is just regular damage. It only matters if the "last hit" is nonlethal. I'm not sure if I like this though. Also, if you're at 0 HP any nonlethal is lethal damage. This does support the above interpretation that nonlethal damage is still regular damage. I'm trying to write some code to handle damage using MapTool and I think I want to keep track of any nonlethal damage taken so if someone is reduced to 0 or lower HP to check it versus the nonlethal damage to see if they die, go unconscious and are dying or go unconscious and are stable. At this point all nonlethal hp disappear. For example, if Bob has 20 HP, 20 Stamina and takes 10 nonlethal at start of combat reducing him to 20HP/10SP and continues to take normal damage through combat where he's at 5HP. When he takes 10 more damage he's reduced to 0 HP and because his nonlethal damage was greater than the overdamage then he's just unconscious and stable. Note that if the nonlethal was equal to the overdamage, then he would be dying. This can also save him from massive damage. If at 5HP and he takes 25 damage, this would normally kill him, but the nonlethal reduces the overdamage by 10 making it only 10 overdamage. He goes unconscious and is dying because the nonlethal wasn't sufficient compared to the real damage done.
I imagine it just allows me to access 18 levels of spells without having to pull out a scroll saving me time. But I'm wondering about whether I can treat those spells as spells known for spontaneous casting?
I used Xotani as a guide from the pfsrd for the heart, but I'm going to reduce the SR to 26, so the PC spell casters have a 50/50 chance of effecting it with spells. They're 14th level, but get +1 to caster level checks from Spooky buff. I use MapTool and for Xotani's heart I use this image I cobbled together and tweaked: https://www.dropbox.com/s/kjsdwcxq5bdwnrn/Xotani's%20Heart.png?dl=0
Here's how I handled Xontani's grave with various changes. * Teleport Trap over entire area. This brings them back to the beginning where Jhavhul has his greeting. Also, the dispel magic vs fire resistant magics kicks in again.
So, it can't pass through a force cage even in whirlwind form? The way I see whirlwind is you're an air swarm. The fact that you don't provoke AoO and can freely pass through enemy squares like a swarm means that you're insubstantial, but not incorporeal like gaseous form. The limits in this form seem to confirm that, but don't actually say it.
My group plays that it create an arrow appropriate for its current size and does not resize when fired. It is unaffected by the enlarge person because it's a spell that creates an item. Btw, I found the ultimate bow for this effect, Bow of Ashes. It's much cheaper than the +4 bonus the weapon would be normally (+1, flaming, endless ammo) because it has a limiter on it. I found the best way to have it activate is to have an ioun torch which has a "flame the size of a torch".
Since they're made of air I assume they can pass through things like someone in gaseous form, but there is no mention of that. What I'm wanting to do is create a whirlwind and bang creatures against a force cage by passing through it. It'll just do slam damage and drop them, but I was wondering if that was possible.
A bit of a thread rez, but I think I have a good description that helps define what is going on with this spell. When cast, the target feels in invisible force grab him. The caster must wait until his next turn to try and throw the target. If the target knows what spell was cast and wants to resist it he can spend his full round resisting giving him +4 on the casters turn when he may or may not try to throw him. But why bother since the target already wasted his turn. Anyway, when the caster tries to throw the target and the target makes his save, nothing happens and the caster's action is wasted. If the target fails the save he is thrown up to 30 feet and if he hits something he takes and does damage according to the chart. The target then falls prone (if not flying) and is dazed for 1 round. The dazed part is functionally how it is described in the text without using the word dazed. I assume the violent action of being thrown disorients the target enough to daze them for a round. I think using daze helps since now you can apply other game mechanics to the condition rather than just saying they lose a turn. Some things to note. If the target becomes invisible or just plain hides you can't thrown him at anyone, but if you still have line of effect you could still move them 30ft in a direction of your choosing hoping they hit a wall, floor or ceiling. Freedom of movement negates the effects of this spell since the spell says it grabs the target.
Will there be gnome ships powered by giant space hamsters with a sign on the side saying, "We are bad!" bristling with about 100 ballistas?
I'm a little late reading the reply, but I agree. It doesn't do unarmed damage. It just allows you to use deflect arrows and snatch arrows as if you were unarmed. So, follow up question. Is there any other weapon in pathfinder that allows you to use the monk unarmed damage in place of the weapons normal damage? Brass Knuckles once allowed a monk to use his unarmed strike damage, but that was snatched away in ultimate equipment.
Each time an endless ammunition weapon is nocked, a single non-magical arrow or bolt is spontaneously created by the magic, so the weapon's wielder never needs to load the weapon with ammunition. Since the ammunition is spontaneously created does the enlarge person spell effect that spell (minor creation) and create a large arrow which reduces when fired? Or does the magic of the bow create a large arrow because the bow is large? Or is the bow locked in to one type of creation at the time of the bows creation, so only medium arrows are created, which would be unaffected by the enlarge person since it didn't exist at the time the spell was cast? My thought is that it creates an arrow appropriate for the size of the bow meaning that it doesn't reduce in size when fired. All the other FAQ and threads about endless ammunition say it's horribly priced and compared to other items of similar effect I would have to agree. Now if the endless ammunition could create blunt arrows, flight arrows, splinter arrows and the like (all made of wood and non-magical) then I could see where the +2 was justified. I'm wondering what the original intent was for this item to justify a +2 enhancement.
More importantly, the Feral Hunter gets access to Animal Focus and Greater Animal Focus, which he can use to buff his strength, dexterity or constitution in human or beast form; Are you sure about applying it for beast form (wild shape)? As a GM, I would totally allow it, but the animal focus and wild shape are two different polymorph abilities and by RAW I think you have to chose one or the other. I think RAI should allow it, but rules under polymorph don't. It would be nice if that clarification was made under the Hunter/Feral Hunter class.
Here's an item I created many years ago in 3.5.
Gloves of Readied Ammo:
Gloves of Readied Ammo
Price (Item Level): 25,000 gp (15th) Body Slot: — (hands) Caster Level: 12th Aura: Strong; (DC 21) conjuration Activation: Free (manipulation) Weight: — These gloves appear as a light tan set of sturdy leather work gloves snuggly fit to the wearer’s hand. On the back of each glove in an embroidery of a hammer and anvil surrounded by small stitching patterned after various thrown or projectile weapons. Once per day, these gloves will consume 1 ammo item, duplicate it 50 times and store it in the gloves. The embroidered pattern on the back of the gloves will mimic the number and the item that was consumed. This will only work on arrows, bolts, sling bullets, darts, shuriken, throwing daggers and any other item considered as tiny and ammo-like. The gloves will not work on conjured items or miscellaneous magical items. Any permanent enchantments or poisons on the original item are also duplicated. Spells designed to effect ammunition can be duplicated, but only for the duration of the original spell. An enchantment designed to effect ammunition may be cast on to the gloves to affect the remaining items. Once an item is drawn from the gloves it can not be returned or consumed for the next days use and will dissolve in 1 round. Once an item is thrown or shot, it is always destroyed on impact in a shower of sparks. Drawing items from the gloves is a free action. Inspired by Gloves of Endless Javalins (M194) and Glove of Storing (D257). Prerequisites: Craft Magical Arms and Armor, Craft Wondrous Item, magic weapon, major creation and shrink item.
History:
Endless Ammunition is already a +2 magic weapon enchantment. Putting a permanent abundant ammunition on a quiver will be very powerful despite the small cost. Some spells just don't translate well when making a magic item like true strike. Even looking back at the gloves I made seems to be under priced. If I changed it to non-magical ammo duplication, it would be better priced.
I notice the weapon is a bit pricey. It's a +5 weapon that costs 75000 + 350 for material and masterwork. A +5 weapon is normally 50000. There appears to be either another +1 added making it 72000 and an additional 3000 OR it has a 1.5 multiplier added. I don't see much difference between a normal +3 ki intensifying weapon. Katana is already a monk weapon. I'm guessing either the monk damage is another +1 and the 3000 is to treat as unarmed for purposes of using abilities requiring one hand free. It's going to be that or the unarmed damage costs 1.5 which is very pricey and I can't think of any other mod that adds 1.5 to a weapon. I guess I'm looking for a way to add monk unarmed damage to another weapon. In 3.5 there was the scorpion dagger +1 which costs 6000+ making the unarmed mod cost 4000. I'm looking for insight how they priced this weapon.
Either things changed since the class was created or it wasn't thought through, imo. Rapid shot and multishot can't be used with flurry but can only be used with full attack. Why the heck were these put on the monk bonus feat list since the zen archer essentially can't use? A much better option would be to add snapshot and improved snapshot since the monk could use those without having to take the feats he can't use. The level 9 ability is essentially snap shot anyway. Also, the ki strike abilities are still left on the unarmed attack. Shouldn't the monk be able to use through bow instead?
That's actually a very good question. I evaluated the applicable rules and determined that, since "main-hand" and "off-hand" are terms that only have context in regards to TWF, and the penalties only apply to your "main-hand" attack and "off-hand" attack specifically, your AoO attack, which is neither, doesn't suffer from... So, what you are saying is that AoOs defy all logic and are "magic". I can live with that just like I can live with the prone rules... it's just a game mechanic that can defy all logic at times. I play games using MapTool, a VTT and as a simplicity to combat when I make a trip attack that is successful I then just make a full normal flurry attack where the first attack is actually my AoO. It just so happens that all the numbers work out the same with or without the flurry until I reach level 9. I'm doing a little reprogramming of the macros and I was thinking of being able to include trip, disarm and sunder in to the attack combo. Trip is really the only one that can effect your attack bonus directly although sunder could destroy a target's shield. I had a player tell me about AoO being out of the full attack sequence and at the time I agreed with him, but I thought I'd revisit it on the forums just to make sure. (FYI, I use "magic" in quotes to emphasize a game mechanic because I use to have a player who would dispute the logic of almost all situations bringing the game to a crawl. Saying it was "magic" seemed to help.)
There is one thing that seems to be skirted around. Making an AoO during the full attack and provoked because of the full attack.
So, a common maneuver I like to do is a flurry of blows where I start off my set of attacks with an improved trip so the remaining attacks get the benefit of +4 to hit (if target is tripped). Toss in vicious stomp for good measure. So, are the two AoOs I get during my flurry have no TWF/Flurry penalty? To make things even more complicated, my BAB changes with flurry. I think for simplicity's sake that during the flurry all mods are applied to AoOs. Only when the flurry or TWF attack is over does it not apply. The FAQ seems to conflict what it says with the general rule at end. Although, I do believe the AoO is taken outside whatever action is being taken I think the circumstances still warrant the penalty (and BAB bonus for flurry) if done during the maneuver. I'm trying to think of another example of a temporary penalty that wouldn't apply to AoO, but this seems to be the only one I can come up with.
I noticed that this domain power for Void: Stars replaces the 8th level power, but doesn't have the usual "At 8th level," in the text. Is this an oversight, or do you get both domain powers at 1st level?
I've always played that ability damage and drain stack. The main difference is that ability damage is temporary and applies a penalty to stat rather than changing it like drain does.
But this seems to contradict that notion.
And then bleed seems to confirm it saying they are essentially the same.
Putting all this info together I think I came up with suitable comparison. Damage vs nonlethal damage. If I bleed for damage and nonlethal, then only the damage will be applied (perhaps some NLD if more than damage?). Would that be the same for ability damage and drain. It says take the worse effect which suggests dropping all the lesser effect even if the effect is more for the lesser. So, if I take 1d4 bleed nonlethal and 1 bleed (lethal), do I ignore the nonlethal bleed or roll it and apply the nonlethal damage that's above the lethal? That seems like the right thing to do. Extra: I was trying to think of the effective difference for damage and drain. Damage applies specific penalties base on stat, but won't affect things like extra spells or qualifying for feats, but drain will. Damage is also applied only every 2 points. So, having a 14 dex and 1 dex damage won't reduce your AC, but drain will.
Question about Pommel Swipe: Spoiler:
Pommel Swipe (Ex): At 7th level, the swashbuckler can as
a swift action spend 1 panache point to make a surprise melee attack with the pommel of a light or one-handed piercing weapon she is wielding. The swashbuckler is considered proficient with this weapon attack. The attack deals bludgeoning damage, and gains a bonus on the attack and damage equal to the enhancement bonus of the weapon. The damage dealt by the pommel swipe is determined by the size of the weapon being used. Small weapons deal 1d4 damage, while Medium weapons deal 1d6 damage. Regardless of the weapon’s size the critical multiplier of this attack is 20/×2. If the attack hits, the swashbuckler can as a free action attempt a combat maneuver check to knock the target prone. Since it counts as a blunt weapon, none of the swashbuckler's other ability seem to count toward the attack including weapon training. Is this correct?
Question about Targeted Strike: Torso or Wings... Spoiler:
Targeted Strike (Ex): At 7th level, as a full-round action
the swashbuckler can spend 1 panache point to make a single light or one-handed piercing weapon melee attack that cripple’s part of a foe’s body. The swashbuckler chooses a part of the body to target. If the attack succeeds, the target takes the following effects, depending on the part of the body targeted. If a creature doesn’t have one of the listed body locations, that part cannot be targeted. Creatures that are immune to sneak attacks are immune to these effects. Items or abilities that protect a creature from a critical hit also protect a creature from a targeted strike. • Arms: On a hit, the target takes no damage from the attack but drops one carried item of the swashbuckler’s choice, even if the item is wielded with two hands. Items held in a locked gauntlet aren’t dropped on a hit. • Head: On a hit, the target is damaged normally and is confused for 1 round. This is a mind-affecting effect. • Legs: On a hit, the target is damaged normally and knocked prone. Creatures with four or more legs or that are immune to trip attacks are immune to this effect. • Torso or Wings: Targeting the torso causes the target to be staggered for 1 round. The other 3 mention damage and hitting, but this one does not. Should I assume it does normal damage on hit and then staggers, or is it an autohit with no damage, or somewhere in between?
I see what you mean. If I have a flurry of attacks, I can let the first guy attack me, then pelt him until he is dead. With any remaining shots I could let another adjacent enemy attack me and use my remaining shots on them. I don't have to chose who can attack me until I decide I need to attack them.
Thanks, that's how I read it too. This feat is very similar to the Robilar's Gambit in 3.5, but that one gives everyone around you a shot at you. I was just reading the crane styles yesterday and noted that fact myself. Interesting to note though if you take full progression of crane style, then you could attack defensively -1 attack/+4 AC (w/3 rank acro) giving a total +8 AC with this feat and if someone happened to hit you, you could still smack them back 1/round. This feat could go well with shot on the run, if you decide to shoot while near the enemy. The problem with this feat would be the GM. Once the first goblin missed you and you hit them back then suddenly everyone on the field won't fall for it... Depending on GM, of course.
Swift Feint had me scratching my head. Maybe it's just the name. It looks more like a Distracting Attack. Use a standard attack and if you would normally hit, then cause them to be Flat-footed instead until their next action. This would be good if you have a rogue or if you want the rest of party to avoid AoO from target. Personally, I wouldn't see using this very often if ever. In order to get the most benefit out of it, I would need to delay until after they attacked and then hope I hit. But then if there was a rogue in group, I would be foregoing my damage for him to do his damage, assuming he hits. The rogue would need to do double damage over me to really make it worth while.
Any official (or well-informed) answers out there?
Will there be another playtest download or will we have to wait for final release to see the current changes already made in the class discussions?
Ah, I see. Then I totally agree that the capstone power it too powerful as is. You can sacrifice all your spells and then recast them with +2 DC or spell level. Perhaps doubling the cost to recall a spell or limiting the number of times this can be done would be a good solution. But increasing the cost, IMO would still be too powerful.
Re: The Capstone power. Doesn't it say you can only do it once per spell? So, in the Wish example on page 6, you could only spend points once to cast an extra Wish spell.
I like the idea of another WIS arcane caster. Makes my arcane monk (zen archer) easier to build. I use just Qinggong to get some extra spell ability for now.
How about some non-magical goggles that reduces the light level by 1 and gives -1 to sight perception checks, 500g.
I would like to see a weaponmaster martial monk. One who can use any weapon (more or less) and be able to use his hand damage through it. Perhaps, enlarged hand damage with 2 handed weapons. Every martial arts movie I see usually has at least one monk using a polearm. I would also like to see monks be able to use their special material DR bypass with their weapon of choice. Maybe require weapon focus?
I noticed there is no Brawler discussion thread. Is that something that is new? A friend just pointed me to the playtest. We're going to do a module, levels 6-8, with only hybrid characters and post our thoughts on these forums. I'm going to try and remake some of the NPCs in to these hybrid classes to give everyone a good feel for the characters.
Has anyone mentioned "spellfire" yet? When converting 2nd edition to 3.5 I came up with a points system. It was more like a warlock in the end though, but could heal small amounts using raw magic. Approaching this like rogue talents has a lot of promise (although there are like only 3 worthwhile talents). I like the Qinggong monk substitutions for feats, spells or abilities based on level mechanic as well.
Choose a ranged weapon or a thrown weapon. When you make a ranged attack using that weapon, you can choose to provoke an attack of opportunity from one or more opponents who threaten you. You gain a +4 dodge bonus against such attacks. An opponent that makes such an attack and misses you loses his Dexterity bonus to AC against you until the end of your turn. So, if I have 2 enemies near me, can I chose to only allow one of them an AoO? Or is that just a weird way of saying that when I use the feat all opponents who threaten me get an AoO. If that were the case, it should read ".. you can choose to provoke an attack of opportunity from all opponents who threaten you." Putting the "one or more" sounds like I can chose who I let attack me. Is that correct?
Ah, I think "ending" your move in an illegal square clears it up for me. So, I think standing and taking all the AoOs (-4 for prone) with perhaps a Total Defense to offset prone. I don't think squeezing is an issue since you can move past creatures normally without undo penalty. Once standing, I have not ended my movement and take a 5ft step. Leaving a difficult terrain square doesn't cost you extra. That would be the full action if done with Total Defense. If I had no where to move, then things would get interesting. I would need to either acrobatics, bull rush or overrun my way out of there to get to legal spot before the end of my turn. But upon failure and a legal spot 10ft away, would I just pop there?
Can someone verify that this is all correct. I'm trying to write a macro for a VTT game (MapTool) and I want to make sure I have all the mods correct. I'm going to use an overall bonus compared to the original CMB or CMD in my examples. So, if defender has a penalty and attack has a bonus, I add them together as a bonus for attacker just so I know the relative strengths of an action. I'm not going to consider bonuses from feats, BABs or size in my examples; only the relative roll from the initial grab attempt. When successfully grappling a target, both gain the grappled condition which is a -4 DEX. This reduces both of their CMD's by 2. In addition, they both gain a -2 to attacks and combat maneuvers (-2 CMB) except when making a grapple check (attack or escape). For example, the one grappled could potentially trip someone nearby, but the grappler couldn't because he has to maintain with a standard action. Higher levels of grappling allow for the grappler to do other stuff with standard action. So, does this mean the grappled targets first escape attempt is essentially at +2 (because both CMDs went down)? Assuming the escape fails, the grappler then has to maintain hold and attempts to Pin. The target's CMD is 2 lower now and he gets a +5 to continue grapple, essentially making it a +7 compared to first roll. Now the target is pinned and is denied DEX bonus (assume DEX 6 because of -4 unless original DEX was lower than 10?) and takes an additional -4 to AC (circumstance). Lets compare a high dex and no dex targets. The no dex target would be at -6 CMD and on the next grapple check by grappler would put his roll at +11. For a high dex character the check is even better adding the targets normal dex bonus to attackers next grapple check. Now here's the part I'm unclear about: "Pinned is a more severe version of grappled, and their effects do not stack." Which effects? So, don't include the -4 DEX? Instead, just use the FFCMD (no dex or dodge. I know he's not actually FF). So instead of the next grapple check at +11 for no dex, it is at +9 (-4 AC, +5 maintain)? I just want to make sure this is what that line is talking about. (pretty sure this is correct way) The pinned character still has the same escape chance of +2 because being pinned does not reduce his CMB (unless tiny or smaller with positive dex bonus) and grappler is at -4 DEX still. Assuming the no dex target and the -4 DEX does not apply to pinned giving the grappler a +9 from original grapple check, in order to tie the pinned target, he'll be at -8 (+9 -10 to tie up, no bonus to maintain grapple -5, -2 for grappled condition) Going from +9 to maintain, to -8 to tie up is pretty hard, imo. So, is Tie up still considered grappling? If so, we can add back the +5 and remove the -2 penalty making the Tie up roll at -1 from original grapple attempt for a no dex target. Other questions:
I would say by RAW that you can not. That is what Heighten Spell (meta) is for. In my games, I house rule that everyone gets Heighten Spell for free. Since it is based on a meta feat, the sorcerer would also need to take a full round to cast the spell. I also ignore that in my game.
Our group recently encountered this situation. One member was struck down to negative hit point and went helpless. I step on to his square and attacked. I then got one shotted to -1. The opponent moved over our bodies to an adjacent square and a goblin on top of us. The cleric then did a channel and we both became conscious. Laying there I suppose I could attack from prone, but I prefer to get up. Here are my questions: 1 - If I just attack do I get the prone and squeezing penalties or just prone?
We ended up doing #3 where I failed my strength contest with a goblin (humiliating) and moved to an adjacent square with my 5ft. The was a move to get up and a 5ft, so I was able to brain him with a standard freeing up the square for the other party member and taking the AoOs. If guess I do have another question: 4 - was the strength contest even necessary because I have movement left. I suppose if I wanted to force the goblin out of square.
Enemies and allies provide soft cover to your target and that would be +4 AC for the target. But it doesn't matter how many are in the way unless your DM says otherwise. We recently came up with a house rule that says you can ignore any ally not in melee combat. The reasoning behind that is you can tell them to get out of the way. We also think the soft cover rule is a bit restrictive in what counts, so we included a partial soft cover. These rules also apply to reach weapons. With soft cover, I don't believe size matters for range attacks. House Rules: http://www.epicwords.com/forums/8847?post_id=80448#post80448
You can use a healers kit to Treat Deadly Wounds once a day and receive your level in hp or if you beat the DC by 5, level + ability bonus of healer. Technically, you can treat the wounds without the kit but take a -4 and you should have some roleplay explanation of how you're treating the wounds. Perhaps use of survival or knowledge nature to scrounge up available materials to substitute for kit.
I do have a tweak with reach weapons. I think I may have listed the modifier wrong in my examples. The reach weapon would get no penalty for cover, but defender would still get the -4 AC with melee attack. The range rules for a reach weapon only applies to cover, so it's still considered a melee weapon. Unlike 3.5, if you have an ally in front of you with your reach weapon, the target will get a +4 AC for soft cover. Soft cover and prone cover don't stack. Ranged attackers would only get the -4 to attack rather than -8 if shooting a prone target with an ally in the way.
PRONE Official Rule:
Prone
The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks. Standing up is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity. Reworded:
Prone
The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 cover bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks at greater than 5ft, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks. Ranged attacks from attackers with a reach able to normally attack the prone character give no cover AC bonus against the ranged attack and attacker does not receive a bonus to hit. Standing up is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity. Examples:
I'm not sure if casting and using scorching ray provokes two AoO. One for casting and one for ranged attack. As I understand it, the range attack is a free action and is a part of spell. So, if cast defensively then there would be no AoO. Defining the prone AC bonus vs range as a cover bonus will allow things like soft cover to not stack. Improved precise shot would also eliminate the AC bonus. The philosophy of being prone vs range and it giving you a bonus to AC is because you are reducing your profile to the attack and using the ground as hard cover. But if the attacker is directly over you, then you don't get that cover. Attackers with Reach weapons or ones that could normally just touch you with their normal reach but are using a ranged weapon also negate the cover bonus since they are able to guide the attack to a 0 range of prone target. I also considered if the prone target is larger and how that would affect a range modifier, but decided there was no easy answer that I liked. Perhaps, huge and larger creature who falls prone do not get AC bonus vs range attacks. They're just too big to gain cover from the ground and reduce their profile, but I'm not sure I agree with that.
|
