concerned-citizen's page

25 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Um...slight tangential question here:
If you are falling at either 500'/r or 1,000'/r and successfully cast Feather Fall...is it reasonable to assume that since your falling speed is immediately reduced you would take "falling" damage...?
[...or am I reading far too much reality into the velocity change...?]

As always, thanks.


I realize this is about four years after the fact, but...I don't understand why there's a Fortitude save in the basic info and no explanation for it in the spell description. There's no Fortitude save if you get attacked by green slime in the usual manner.

...what am I missing...?


I think I forgot to mention that we were somewhere between 5,000' and 10,000' above an ocean.

...sorry...


Except that the caster did not end the spell...which would normally result in a Feather Fall effect for 1d6 rounds. He kept the spell going but did not use it. They put forward the concept that just because one had a fly speed, one did not have to make use of it.

I guess I should have mentioned that when he caught up with the baddies, he made use of his fly speed from the spell and was able to match their speed and defeat them.


Okay, so I was in a gaming session a couple of days ago and one of the players did something that sounds ridiculously impossible...
His character had cast the Fly spell on himself so he could easily go from our airship to the attacking airship with no chance of falling. The baddies jumped overboard to try and get away and they had a head start of one or two rounds of freefall so he went to where they dropped off the ship and instead of flying straight down, he simply didn't make use of the fly speed and fell. Eventually, he caught up with the baddies who had made use of a Feather Fall spell to keep from going splat.

Does this make sense to anybody out there? It sure as heck doesn't make any sense to me.

...needless to say, the DM agreed with the player that that's how the Fly spell works...
Huh?!?!


Sooo...falling 30' onto a door [like a trap door] causes 3d6 damage and your DR/non-bludgeoning won't do anything...but...a giant that wallops you with a door for 3d6 damage has to deal with your DR/non-bludgeoning because getting hit is bludgeoning damage and hitting is untyped damage and this is supposed to make some sort of sense...somehow...?

Even though it sounds like I'm b@@$%ing about this, I'm really trying to understand the difference.

...as always, thanks for putting up with me...


So...technically...assuming these rules interpretations are accepted in a game, it would be possible for a 5th level wizard with the Craft Wand feat and 4 negative levels to make a wand of fireball at 1st caster level. It would cost 1,125 gp and 2 days to make and be able to spit out 50 1d6 fireballs with a maximum range of 440'. At 2,250 gp it would be the cheapest fireball wand in existence. And also the least effective.


My character has recently been granted access to the Alchemical Power Components chapter for our campaign. I'm wondering if they're ever going to expand the list of spells to include those not in the Core Rulebook...


Just like all the other feats, it really depends on how you use it or intend to use it.
True, taking Weapon Specialization for your greatsword doesn't have that much of an effect. However, taking Weapon Specialization for your dagger [or some other low damage weapon] has a much greater effect.

Back in 3.5, I had a fighter that specialized in shuriken. By the time she had taken Greater Weapon Specialization, she also had Greater Two-Weapon Fighting and Rapid Shot not to mention all the other feats required for those. The end result was up to 7 shuriken per round with each one that hit doing 1d2+5 damage. There were other attack and damage modifiers, but they don't apply to this example.

So, like all the other feat, think carefully how you want your character to be able to act/react in combat [and other situations...].


It sounds like you need to find a new DM.


...and since it is attached, it would be really difficult to "disarm" you of your shield. You should also be unaffected if some idiot casts the grease spell on your "weapon"...


So, basically what people are saying is a feat is more powerful than a racial ability.
How often can you add a racial ability to your character?
Answer: pretty much never.
How often can you take a feat?
Answer: every odd level.
Therefore, which one should be more powerful?
Answer: the racial ability should be more powerful than an ability gained by the taking of a feat.

As always, thanks for listening.
...or, at least, putting up with me.


I was looking at Table 7-12 in the Core Rulebook to see for myself the difference between one-handed blades and two-handed blades and I noticed something that led me to ask the following "dumb" but related question.
What weapons are "metal-hafted" and "hafted"?
I can figure out for myself some of them.
However...would a quarterstaff qualify as a "two-handed hafted weapon"?
I really don't know.
Hopefully, this isn't considered to be too far from the original post...


Thank you.
So...Agile Maneuvers is the Weapon Finesse for combat maneuvers.
Neato.


Does anybody know of a feat that will allow a character to use their Dexterity [or any other stat, for that matter...] instead of Strength to determine their Combat Maneuver Bonus?


I have found it to be a lot more funner to play a non-balance party than a balanced party. It is sometimes rather challenging when you come upon something that your party can't do but needs to do. This is when you discover new ways to do things.


OK.
I've got a potentially dumb question.

Artisan's Tools: These special tools include the items needed to pursue any craft. Without them, you have to use improvised tools (-2 penalty on Craft checks), if you can do the job at all.

My question is based on something I heard about that happened in a game. One of the players wanted to make use of his character's Craft skill [I think it was Craft (armour)] and had a set of artisan's tools. The DM objected because the character did not have an anvil but wanted to fix buckler (assuming I am remembering the situation correctly...).

According to the description of the skill and the artisan's tools, a separate anvil would not be required.

What am I missing?


Actually, DM Blake, master marshmallow is correct.
Core Rulebook, page 458, Spell Completion, fifth sentence: "To use a spell completion item safely, a character must be of high enough level in the right class to cast the spell already."
Also, Core Rulebook, page 490, Scrolls, Activate the Spell, third paragraph, second sentence: "If she meets all three requirements but her own caster level is lower than the scroll spell's caster level, then she has to make a caster level check [DC = scroll's caster level + 1] to cast the spell successfully."
The requirements for wands do not work for scrolls as they are different types of items.
That being said, however, I don't see any problems with your sorcerer gaining access to spells he couldn't ordinarily cast just at the moment due to insufficient caster level as long as he doesn't screw up his caster level check and then fail a DC 5 Wisdom check.
Should work good.


My turn for a "dumb" question.
The description for a Headband of Vast Intellect [to continue with the aforementioned object] includes the granting of skill ranks equal to the wearer's HD if it is worn for more than 24h.
If you create a Headband...do you have to have ranks in the skill[s] the item enhances?
Also, if the Headband is a +4 or a +6, does it grant these skill ranks per skill times Hit Dice or just one skill rank per Hit Die of the wearer spread over the two or three different skills?
I have to ask because the description of the item is not exactly clear on these points as far as I'm concerned.


Would this mean that a Tiny creature wielding a reach weapon would still have a reach of 0? Would it need the Lunge feat to be able to use a melee weapon on an opponent 5' away?


I've got a potentially stupid question...
Since a light shield can be used as an off-hand martial weapon...does this mean it can be wielded as one of the weapons for Two-Weapon Fighting?
And if so...would its shield bonus to AC stack with the shield bonus to AC granted by the Two-Weapon Defense feat?
And, yes, I do realize that most bonuses don't stack...


What about magic item creation and the Aid Another action?
I know there is a feat (I forget the name of it) that grants a +2 automatically and also increases the amount of progress in a day, but that is more than the Aid Another action does.
Does anybody have any insight into this?

As always, thank you for letting me speak my mind.


Technically, holy water is sold at a loss, not at cost. The cost for a flask is 3cp. If it was sold "at cost" it would cost 25gp, 3cp. Most people consider this to be unnecessary, so...the 3cp gets dropped. I'm sure most peasants wouldn't consider 3cp to be negligible...
Also, a torch goes for 1cp...

Again, thanks for letting me butt in and speak my piece...


Um...am I the only one who has noticed that one of the requirements to make an Ioun Torch [in the book] is that one must be a 12th level caster?
In fact, one has to be able to make a proper Ioun Stone in order to be able to make an Ioun Torch...which is essentially what various people above have described as a burnt out Ioun Stone with Continual Flame cast upon it.
Besides...if one can purchase burnt out Stones on the open market [25gp each...] then one should be able to make their own Torches by casting the spell on it.
Also, there is a feat called False Focus from Inner Sea Magic, page 10. I'm sure that some games would allow it. [even though it is a little powerful, possibly broken...]
This would allow a 3rd level wizard, who has the spell Continual Flame in his/her spellbook, to make their own Ioun Torch for the price of a burnt out Ioun Stone.

Just how broken does this item sound now?

As usual, thanks for letting me speak my mind.


If I may be permitted to make an observation, I'd like to point out that the original poster of this particular thread claimed to be "trying to recover from a bad lung infection." I don't know about anybody else, but I have seen the effects of severe asthma attacks, first hand. I am going to assume that a "bad lung infection" would carry similar consequences. This means one is desperately trying to intake enough air simply to breathe properly. One's energy level is extremely low, and one would not, repeat NOT, want to speak on the phone/speak in person to somebody/check emails on a regular basis.

Being out of breath sucks. Especially when it hits really hard. When taking really shallow breaths is all you can do, one just doesn't have the energy to do much at all.

Also, I am going to further assume that "pissedoffplayer" does not live alone. Said potential roommate/lover/spouse/whatever most likely would have/should have informed the person continually coming to the door [let's call him/her "pissedoffplayersGM"...] of the state of health of the other person.

On the other hand, if "pissedoffplayer" >>does<< live alone, that could go a long way towards explaining why s/he would not have responded to "pissedoffplayersGM" when s/he called/emailed/showed up unannounced. "Pissedoffplayer" would most likely be struggling for breath.

Hopefully, this observation is of some small assistance to everybody.

...and, yes, this is my first time posting on this site.

Thank you for your time.