How do concentration check rules work under multiple distractions?
Say you try to cast a spell while grappled on a ship in violent motion in a hailstorm while being sickened from an ongoing spell. Would that be only one concentration check against the highest DC (probably from being grappled), ignoring all the other effects? Would that be four concentration checks? Would it be one with a DC that is somehow higher?
A more typical example would be casting while under the effect of e.g. Elemental Touch (acid). You both take 1 point of ongoing damage, which calls for a DC 11 + Spell Level, and are sickened for the duration, which calls for a check against Spell save DC + Spell Level.
Hmmm, I am not sure that's how it works.
If you opponent is blinded, you have total concealment.
So the opponent has to figure out where you are, no matter if you have used an action to stealth or not.
"Ignoring concealment" goes on to clarify: "Although invisibility provides total concealment, sighted opponents may still make Perception checks to notice the location of an invisible character. An invisible character gains a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if moving, or a +40
So say I battle an opponent, blind him with e.g. Dirty Trick or Blindness, then make a 5-foot step either to the left, right or back.
As far as I know, the question of delivering touch spells through maneuvers has never been definitivly answered. It's not just a question for the magus, anyone can deliver touch spells through an unarmed strike, and use an unarmed strike to perform a maneuver.
The critical rule is CRB p. 186: "Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge." Your answer will mostly hinge on how you read "normal" in that context. Is a trip maneuver a normal attack? Some think yes, some think no, I know of no official answer.
A Magus with spellstrike has it a bit easier to argue his part, as spellstrike says "...a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell." No "normal" there. However, the next sentence goes "If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell." That makes it clear that an attack that deals damage was meant, which Trip and Disarm are not.
Regarding spellstrike with sunder, I see no reason to believe that the spell wouldn't be subject to hardness when delivered through an adamantine weapon. The hardness would not apply to the weapon damage, but it would apply to the spell, because those are two different things. It would be like claiming that because energy damage ignores Damage Reduction, a weapon delivering an energy spell should ignore a monsters damage reduction for its weapon damage. Not so, those are two separate damages, and they should be checked separately for resistances, hardness, DR etc. I'd even say that if there is a touch spell that does damage suseptable to DR (don't know if there is), delievering it to an enemy with DR would mean the DR reduces the weapon damage and the spell damage separately.
Regarding the question of whether the critical range applies, opinions are devided. The spellstrike text says "This attack uses the weapon’s
I'd say no new levels, but he ratains all abilities. Paladins annd clerics channel their gods power, and the god is angry that you left his path, so he doesn't give you power anymore. The barbarian lets himself go and if he gets lawful, his mind has become too ordered for that (which is stupid I admit). Bt an assassin is just someone with a training in murder, why would that training go away? And if used against monsters, why would that be a problem for a neutral assassin?
It should be the other way around: If you continues to assassinate people of humanoid races, his alignment might shift back to evil. But anyway he should still know how to do it.
My understanding is that the evil requirement is implied to mean that assassins will only train someone with their amoral worldview, hence the necessary killing of an innocent. You prove to your trainers thatt you have no qualms. Devellop qualms, and they will not train you further (and probably try to kill you).
OK, I think the point has been argued enough, everybody knows everybody's positions, even if they differ. The devs do not seem likely to change the wording again soon, so lets give it a rest and go back to the rules questions.
A few other things are still unclear to me regarding spell combat:
- When I cast a touch spell, I get a free touch attack (or weapon attack with spellstrike). Core rulebook p. 185 says "You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target." Do I understand this correctly that when using spell combat with spellstrike, I can cast a touch spell, take a 5-foot step, attack with the free weapon attacks including the touch charge, and then make my other normal attacks? Or does "take your move" only mean "use a move action to move", which we don't have in a full-round action?
- The FAQ cleared up that natural attacks and unarmed strikes can be used with spellstrike. Do we have an official word yet about whether the Arcana Pool enhancement can be used with unarmed strikes? With a natural attack? With a monks unarmed strike, whose "counts both as natural and manufactured" rules is seen by some as implying it should be treated like any other weapon attack?
- When I cast Shocking Grasp with spellstrike, does my weapon attack also get the +3 to attack vs. metal-clad or wielding opponents? Seems counterintuitive that wielding a metal weapon makes it easier to hit someone wiith a sword.