That was the point of contention. The description of Anti-Magic Field implies it only blocks things if it doesn't go down, maybe it's meant as an exception to the normal state of affairs, but it's not clear. To me, it seems natural that if a barrier is destroyed by some burst then it doesn't protect anything behind it. The barrier is no longer there to break line of effect.
A Prismatic Wall/Sphere is destroyed by a Mage's Disjunction. However, is a person behind/within the Prismatic defence protected from the Disjunction?
Disjunction states that it has a chance to take down Anti-magic field, and if it doesn't then items within are not disjoined. Which implies that if does take it down, then items within are disjoined.
So does the same apply to a Prismatic Sphere? If a disjunction is targeted outside the sphere (I would say it can't be targeted inside the sphere, from the outside), then the sphere will go down. But what happens to things inside the sphere? The behaviour of Anti-magic field would suggest to me that things within/behind the Prismatic Sphere/Wall will not be protected.
At a lower level, what would a Wall of Force? Does that block the effects of a Disjunction, even though it itself is destroyed?
It's mentioned in the description of the Leng Device (p354 of Anniversary Edition) that it's similar to the ring of stone in Magnimar. However, even after flicking through the "Magnimar, City of Monuments" book, I can't find any reference to a ring of stone.
Can anyone tell me what is this actually referring to? Thanks.
As the Roll20 user who started prodding Berti to add Sanity support to the character sheet, I think these rules are very confusingly written.
I think just using the current maximum bonus is the simplest solution, then it doesn't matter if all three are the same at character generation. If one changes (goes up or down, due to damage/magic items/spells), then you recalculate what your threshold is.
At least, it's probably the simplest solution from a Roll20 perspective.
Thanks. I actually have two of those (obtained as part of various bundles of holding, so I've never actually read them). I'll start on those and go from there.
Does anyone have any examples for Social Stat Blocks for the individual influence system described in Ultimate Intrigue? The only example I can find is the one on page 108 of that book for "The Spy".
I'd like to see some more examples of Discovery and Influence options for some sample NPCs before I really start using them myself in anger.
Has anyone used these rules in a way that they could share examples, or are there any published adventures which use them?
From what I can gather, Asmodeus is openly worshipped in Cheliax. However, how is worship of this deity treated in other countries? Is he simply viewed as a somewhat harsh and uncaring god of law and order, but nonetheless acceptable in polite society, or is worship of him considered socially (or legally) unacceptable, and forced underground (or at least not paraded in public)?
I'm particularly interested in Varisia (specifically Magnimar), since I have in mind some NPC nobles who worship him. My thought is that as long as the obey the law, it won't be considered an issue by the city (though good aligned people will probably have their suspicions about them).
I did the same. Tsuto also survived, and I name dropped Ironbriar at the end of Burnt Offerings as being the Justice who Tsuto had been sent to for punishment. Someone else on here mentioned the idea of Ironbriar being Tsuto's father, so I ran with that.
They encountered Tsuto in Magnimar (he was staying at Aldern's townhouse), were surprised he hadn't been executed for murder, and then re-captured him and discovered that Ironbriar was his father and that 'paperwork had been lost', which was why Tsuto was free.
Tsuto had absolutely nothing to do with the murders, but the players barked up that tree for a bit. They decided they couldn't trust any of the justices or the Mayor at that point though, and were assuming they were all in on the murders.
Okay, it's not obvious to me that "Line of Effect" applies to all spells. It reads more like some spells are 'Target', some 'Effect', some 'Area' and some have a 'Line of Effect'. Under 'Target', it only states that you need to be able to see or touch the target.
However, I can't find any spells which state 'Line of Effect', so I'm willing to believe that it is a generic requirement. It does make sense, and would also rule out using a mirror in the same situation.
It also implies that for a spell like 'Blade Barrier', it is necessary to see all parts of the barrier when the spell is cast (I've been allowing players to target one end point, then just run the rest of the barrier out of sight until it hits a solid wall). Since the cleric has no 'line of effect' to the other end, they shouldn't be able to do this.
That's going to change some tactics.
For spells which affect multiple specific targets, such as 'Slow' or 'Mass Inflict Light Wounds', does the caster have to be able to see all the targets? Since it's specific targets, my assumption is that the caster must be able to see all targets.
e.g., if there is one target visible, and two more targets are round the corner (maybe 5-10ft away) and out of sight, then only the first target can be affected.
If the above is correct, then what if a spell such as clairvoyance is used to allow sight of the 'hidden' targets? The second spell is not being cast 'through' the clairvoyance, the divination is just being used to be able to see the targets round the corner which are otherwise in range of the spell.
Would this be a valid use of clairvoyance (or a similar spell)?
I've just started running Burnt Offerings (Anniversary Edition), and I'm having difficulties envisaging Ezakien Tobyn. He was meant to be a cleric of Desna, a CG goddess of fun, freedom and luck, and was well loved by everyone in Sandpoint.
However, he seems to have behaved like a complete dick to his adopted daughter, in a way that I would describe as very Lawful and anti-freedom, showing no compassion when she gets pregnant and forcing her to behave in a way that more fits a highly moralising religion.
The players have pretty much decided that he was nasty (they started questioning Naulia's 'death' as soon as Tobyn's remains were stolen, and on hearing the story, decided that she had burnt the church in revenge against her nasty father and was probably now behind the new events), and I have a lot of trouble disagreeing with their conclusions (they've now just captured Tsuto and his notes, so their suspicions have been confirmed).
Has anyone come up with a reason for why Tobyn behaved like he did, that is consistent with him being a cleric of Desna? It doesn't really affect the game, but I'd like to settle things in my mind.