Tamdrik's page

Tamdrik wrote:

cy Prison targets the creature, so that's easy to simply cancel/counter on a failed spell pen check under established RAW (no ice is created in the first place).

I wasn't aware this was established RAW: am I missing a rule or ruling somewhere?

The rules under Casting Time state that targeting decisions are made when the spell comes into...

Sorry about the late response, but I thought the discussion had pretty much petered out. Here's the RAW I'm looking at:

Spell Resistance

Spell resistance (abbreviated SR) is the extraordinary ability to avoid being affected by spells. Some spells also grant spell resistance.

To affect a creature that has spell resistance, a spellcaster must make a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) at least equal to the creature’s spell resistance. The defender’s spell resistance is like an Armor Class against magical attacks. If the caster fails the check, the spell doesn’t affect the creature. The possessor does not have to do anything special to use spell resistance. The creature need not even be aware of the threat for its spell resistance to operate.

Targeted Spells

Spell resistance applies if the spell is targeted at the creature. Some individually targeted spells can be directed at several creatures simultaneously. In such cases, a creature’s spell resistance applies only to the portion of the spell actually targeted at that creature. If several different resistant creatures are subjected to such a spell, each checks its spell resistance separately.

The Spell’s Result

Once you know which creatures (or objects or areas) are affected, and whether those creatures have made successful saving throws (if any were allowed), you can apply whatever results a spell entails.

While there's some wiggle room there for a thinly-sliced interpretation of what it means to be affected by a spell (which is never formally defined), and that the rules never technically say a spell's results do not take place if a targeted creature isn't affected as a result of a successful saving throw or SR, I'd argue that being encased in ice is considered a result of the spell/being affected, even if you can pass through it, if for no other reason than it would block your line of sight. I think even if you argue the RAW, the RAI is clear, and there's no problem in trying to apply the "conventional" interpretation of SR to Icy Prison.

You make all pertinent decisions about a spell (range, target, area, effect, version, and so forth) when the spell comes into effect.

I think this line you're referring to is intended to clarify that, particularly for spells with long casting times, you don't need to specify your targeting up front, which can easily lead to invalid targets when you finally finish casting. This explains why it's found under the "Casting Time" section instead of a section explaining the sequence of casting a spell, and why it contradicts the section on "The Spell's Result". Like "affected by a spell", a spell "coming into effect" is unfortunately not formally defined.

I think doing anything other than just following RAW creates more knock-on issues than it solves.

I disagree, but I can see why you'd feel that way. I think it's fairly easy to just ignore any active effects on things like Wall of Bone, et al., as I suspect is the RAI. Icy Prison targets the creature, so that's easy to simply cancel/counter on a failed spell pen check under established RAW (no ice is created in the first place). Manifested weapons and other force effects are explicitly addressed and easy to mentally reconcile, since they're, well, force effects (basically raw magic made physically manifest). Creeping Ice is frankly easy to ignore entirely, since I have a feeling the number of people who have ever actually cast it in a PF game might be in the single digits, to say nothing about trying to affect anyone with SR, but you can also just ignore the SR: Yes as an oversight.

FWIW, I think Laegrim makes a rather solid logical argument in favor of RAW allowing a creature with SR to pass through a Wall of Ice. At the same time, I'm pretty convinced that the RAI is that it's supposed to apply only to the damage, based on the pretty consistent pattern of spells to which SR applies and the messy adjudications that his interpretation could create, and I suspect the vast majority of GMs would treat it the same way. That said, Creeping Ice is a clear outlier, and if you assume it's written as intended, it's hard to argue that SR can't apply to passive physical obstacles created by magic, since that's all the spell does (it's practically a horizontal Wall of Ice without the damage clause). I'm inclined to believe that the SR: Yes just wasn't thought through on that spell, though.

Even without the corner cases of crossing midnight in an adventuring day and whatnot, it still seems odd that if you clean your weapons before resting the previous day, it doesn't help with misfires the following day. It makes it feel like the designers just wanted standard daily prep like a spellcaster and added a thin veneer of fluff justification.

Activating Cover Fire just make your attack worse.

To fix it, the options need to both be a little better than just a regular attack. My suggestion is two fold, the enemy needs to take a reaction to take cover, and if they don't take cover, your shots ignore their cover for the strike. I think it remains flavorful, and while both options seem powerful on their own, in practice, the ability for the enemy to choose which they do takes it down quite a notch.

I completely agree, and I think that's one reasonable fix. The overwatch option others have suggested would also work, though it could be a separate mechanic. Another fix could be to force a Will save on the target to resist cowering behind cover, taking a penalty to attacks next round on a failure and gaining a condition on a crit failure (maybe frightened 1 or stunned 1).

I'm not a fan of the "+level" skill system either, for reasons others have already discussed ad nauseum, but as far as an alternative, what about something like:

Untrained: +0
Trained: +0 + (Level/5) (round up)
Expert: +1 + (Level/4) (round up)
Master: +2 + (Level/3) (round up)
Legendary: +3 + (Level/2) (round up)

This addresses the "untrained yet amazingly good" phenomenon while maintaining steady growth in any skill you've decided to devote any effort to and keeping the range somewhat reasonable (at least between trained and legendary, where the max separation is 9 at level 20) while still meaningfully differentiating between levels of proficiency.

Admittedly, there's a bit more math/complexity, enough to eliminate any gains on that front that the 2e system may make over 1e, though it does still lend itself to gated feats/actions and reduce skill point micromanagement.