dirgeoverdrive's page

They still have their uses... the switch hitter Elven Ranger in my game uses a buckler. When something gets too close, she drops the bow and draws her longsword.

Do they even need to drop their bow?

They should be able to hold just the bow in the buckler hand without losing the buckler's AC bonus, as they are not using a weapon in that hand.

Please link? First I've heard of this, and would have to apply to monsters with 10' reach as well.

It seems applied haphazardly.

There are some errors in the diagrams though, so trustworthiness is an issue: i.e. the diagram for huge(long) creatures.

"Additionally, while he is within one of his favored terrains, if he gains concealment or total concealment, the miss chance of either type of concealment improves by 10%."

RAW: The %-increase only works in the ranger's favored terrain, but it doesn't seem to require that the concealment come from a terrain effect. So blur in (e.g.) the forest should work.

This is in contrast to the bonus to cover that the ranger(wild shadow) receives: "Whenever a wild shadow is within one of his favored terrains and a feature of that terrain grants him cover..."
The cover bonus explicitly requires that a terrain feature be granting the cover. The concealment bonus does not.

I read the "avoiding any other dangers along its path (including any movement that would provoke attacks of opportunity)" as indicating that the target will stop moving rather than provoke an AoO. For a character with reach, that means the target is stopping just inside their threatened area.

So, I don't see the Bardiche-wielder getting an AoO. If the designers had wanted the feat to read "...ends its move within your melee reach..." they would have. It's hard to imagine this is some unforeseen corner-case.

Perhaps the Bardiche-wielder could instead be holding their Bardiche in one hand during the target's turn, reducing the area the Bardiche-holder threatens (allowing the target to end their move adjacent), and then using armor spikes for the AoO granted by Knight's Calling. Then again, they may not want the target inside their reach.

For me, the FAQ entry on temporary vs permanent ability bonuses barely provides clarity on that specific question and provides zero clarity on the question of how ability-damage penalizes a character.

What we do know is that temporary bonuses to an ability score do not increase the number of times an action linked to that ability score can be used: i.e. bear's endurance doesn't let you rage more often, eagle's splendor doesn't let you lay on hands more often, fox's cunning doesn't grant you more spell slots, and cat's grace shouldn't boost the number of times per round you can make an AoO. Just so, ability damage shouldn't affect how frequently these types of powers can be used. Ability damage affects "skill and statistics" and provides examples. How frequently a power can be used doesn't seem to be considered a "statistic" in the same way that one's attack bonus or armor class is.

So, I don't believe that ability damage should reduce a Combat-Reflexes character's AoO's per turn as the that number is based on their dexterity bonus, a value which dexterity damage does not change. For me, the numbers of AoOs per round and the numbers of Lay on Hands per day both fall in the category of frequency-of-use, i.e. "other bonuses." The rules on drain really highlight the differentiation between ability drain and ability damage.

"Ability Drain: Ability drain actually reduces the relevant ability score. Modify all skills and statistics related to that ability. This might cause you to lose skill points, hit points, and other bonuses." The bold is mine. This tells us that dexterity damage does not actually reduce one's dexterity score. The penalty it applies is not to the score, nor to the bonus, but rather just to related stats.

Ability drain, unlike ability damage, would actually change ability bonuses. It calls out the things other than "skills and statistics" which could be affected, including skill points and "other bonuses." Abilities which can be used a number of times per period (lay on hands, channel energy, spell slots, AoOs w/ CR) based on some ability bonus would be affected.

Caveats: I'm RAI agnostic and don't believe there is such thing as common sense when it comes to adjudicating the rules of a world of wraiths and rapiers.