I can understand the mechanical perspective of the arrow example.
I ve read somewhere, that the spell radius is from every part part of the Dragon.
I don't remember what that means in game terms. but it is not limited to spread from one corner of a single square like normal spreads but spreads from every corner of every occupied square.
By the Idea, that this is because it surrounds the whole Dragon 10 feat in each direction it should move with its biting head. But it feels strange mechanical-wise.
What about the bite attack with 15ft reach? Does it take the amf with it (thus the items of the defending creature don't work) or is the amf limited to every corner of occupated space plus 10ft?
my players are argueing, that it isn't a Charisma-Bonus but a unnamed Bonus equal to the Charisma Bonus and therefore not affected by this exceptation I'm not perfectly into this. Could someone point me to this new ruling? Nevertheless it is cheesy monkeyshine. Alas we agreed to play everything exactly after RAW.
How about your ally who gets dragged, leaving a threatened square passively? Doesn't leaving a threatened Square provoke?
okay, if I drag an Enemy my buddies won't get an AoO neighter, as long as I don't have the 'greater reposition' feat. So I guess he does not provoke when get dragged by me...
OK, so you guys think the opponent has fallen to the grpound, but is not prone.
Logical follow-up questions:
- Does this kind of trip produce an AoO if I have Greater Trip? I guess so: (Greater Trip: "Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that
opponent provokes attacks of opportunity.")
- Since he has fallen to the ground, he shouldn't be flying any more. So can I use that AoO to trip him regularily now?
You get the AoO but it AoO occurs just before the Creature goes to the ground...hence you can not use it to wipe it prone afterwards :/
I agree with gourry187 concerning the falling height.
Feinting isn't mind-affecting. It's baseline trickery and misdirection. Anything that has a stimulus-response ability, which includes mindless creatures, should be able to be feinted.
One can feint any creature at my table as a result.
It may sound silly - what are the odds, that you gamedesigners inadvertently missed to declare intelligent undead immune to feint, although you intended them to be? Even if it is only mundane trickery. Hope you excuse my importunance, it preys on my mind.
a few months ago you vented the oppinion, that: "dazed" should be something that undead are immune to.
How do you think about 'feint'? Since the terms of who is immune to it are so very close to the terms of who is immune to 'mind-affecting'.
Can one feint intelligent undead at your table?
and can one bluff/feint an intelligent undead?
there already is a short tread to this questions, it brought consensus that one can. Do you agree? and further - is it a mind effect?
Actually, I would disagree with James, even if that is kind of bizarr...
on the other hand he concedes, that rulesquestions are not his area of unfailable expertise:
James Jacobs wrote wrote:
I'm not familiar with the Detective or Careful Teamwork; the deeper into the rulebooks you dig, the less the chance is that I've even HEARD of the option. My focus is not on the rulebook line (with the exception of the monster books, that is)... but on our other lines.
Which is another way of saying "That's why I keep asking folks with rulebook questions to ask them in the rulebook forums... that way they can be FAQed but they are then asked in a forum where the others reading them, be they Paizo employees or knowledgeable gamers or both, have a better chance of seeing the question and providing better answers.
After carefull reading of the respective formulations, I distinctly agree with TGMaxMaxer that it is a bardic performance in effect and therefore can be ended by a finale. And when your GM decides not to allow it that way, it is more than fair that you can activate another effect, like Inspire Courage, on top of it. All the more more, because Careful Teamwork sounds a pretty poor deal as replacement for Inspire Courage.
Secondly, you not only implicated your secondary question but explicitly asked it from the beginning, so James reaction was kind of rude, but don't take it to seriously :)
it's not meant to provide additional weapon-hands as it is unable to wield weapons. For this reason it's probably not possible, even if there is a tiny difference.
I've heard a decent interpretation the day before, what do you think?
Is it possible to let a Monkey Belt do Crane Wing. with both hands accupied?
Belt,Monkey:
As a swift action the wearer can command the belt to animate, transforming it into a prehensile tail under the wearer’s control. The tail does not grant the wearer any additional attacks or actions per round, nor can it wield weapons, but it can make unarmed attacks and hold or manipulate objects about as well as the wearer’s normal limbs (though any activity requiring fingers is beyond the tail’s capabilities).
Is it possible to let a Monkey Belt do Crane Wing while Using the Bow with both hands?
Belt,Monkey:
As a swift action the wearer can command the belt to animate, transforming it into a prehensile tail under the wearer’s control. The tail does not grant the wearer any additional attacks or actions per round, nor can it wield weapons, but it can make unarmed attacks and hold or manipulate objects about as well as the wearer’s normal limbs (though any activity requiring fingers is beyond the tail’s capabilities).
Is it possible to let a Monkey Belt do Crane Wing while Using the Bow with both hands?
Belt,Monkey:
As a swift action the wearer can command the belt to animate, transforming it into a prehensile tail under the wearer’s control. The tail does not grant the wearer any additional attacks or actions per round, nor can it wield weapons, but it can make unarmed attacks and hold or manipulate objects about as well as the wearer’s normal limbs (though any activity requiring fingers is beyond the tail’s capabilities).
I was very thankfull for your answer that day.
And I read It exactly that way. I was only hoping to get some more opinions to show my table buddy that it is not a cheesy gap in the system as he considers but broad agreement. I highly recognise your expertise in that matter since I studied some of your threads and answers. I only hoped to get some more approvals to dissolve his doubts.
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus on Sense Motive checks, and you can deal piercing damage with your unarmed strikes. While using the Snake Style feat, when an opponent targets you with a melee or ranged attack, you can spend an immediate action to make a Sense Motive check. You can use the result as your AC or touch AC against that attack. You must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed.
if improved feint let´s you perform a feint as move action, could you spend your standard action to do another feint action? and could you target the same creature with it?
the common opinion here seems to be that feint is not restricted to a certain range, what do you think?
that´s of relevance for the improved feint partner teamwork feat: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/improved-feint-partner-combat-te amwork
As a compromise, I might be inclined to allowed divine bond to enhance the holy sword, but if it was the case, then the divine bond ends when the spell ends. It might be useful in some cases, but the requirement of spending two turn getting the weapon going, and a duration in rounds, will make the choice rather on the weak side.
Decent ruling. good point that it takes two rounds to activate.
Also, if this sort of thing gets your knickers in a twist and really does cause Rangers to be OMGWTFBBQOP broken in your opinion, how in the heck wou you manage to run/play in a game with real casters in it without your head exploding? You want to debate the brokenness of Wizards and such, fine. Debating that one spell makes a Ranger overpowered? Not even close.
Hehehe, I use it as one basement of my ranger-build. my gamemaster almost everytime complains that it were IMBA. It appears to me being pretty strong, too. But then we have no fighter in comparison. I also like your thoughts about the poor availability of an wand of it.
Hm.. are there any other abilities that stack up in such a way like Divine Bond allows? abilities or spells that upgrade an already enhanced objekt/subject in a similar manner? just curious.
This spell allows you to channel holy power into your sword, or any other melee weapon you choose. The weapon acts as a +5 holy weapon (+5 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls, extra 2d6 damage against evil opponents). It also emits a magic circle against evil effect (as the spell). If the magic circle ends, the sword creates a new one on your turn as a free action. The spell is automatically canceled 1 round after the weapon leaves your hand. You cannot have more than one holy sword at a time.
If this spell is cast on a magic weapon, the powers of the spell supersede any that the weapon normally has, rendering the normal enhancement bonus and powers of the weapon inoperative for the duration of the spell. This spell is not cumulative with bless weapon or any other spell that might modify the weapon in any way. This spell does not work on artifacts. A masterwork weapon's bonus to attack does not stack with an enhancement bonus to attack.
On first look it seems otherwise, but there doesn´t seem to be a real exclusion clause. have a look. it is a paladin-only spell, 4th grade. yet, it doesn´t exclude devine bond specifically, only spells.
what if one takes a sword, casts Holy Sword on it for becomming +5 and now using Devine Bond on it.
Divine Bond:
The first type of bond allows the paladin to enhance her weapon as a standard action by calling upon the aid of a celestial spirit for 1 minute per paladin level. When called, the spirit causes the weapon to shed light as a torch. At 5th level, this spirit grants the weapon a +1 enhancement bonus. For every three levels beyond 5th, the weapon gains another +1 enhancement bonus, to a maximum of +6 at 20th level. These bonuses can be added to the weapon, stacking with existing weapon bonuses to a maximum of +5, or they can be used to add any of the following weapon properties: axiomatic, brilliant energy, defending, disruption, flaming, flaming burst, holy, keen, merciful, and speed. Adding these properties consumes an amount of bonus equal to the property's cost. These bonuses are added to any properties the weapon already has, but duplicate abilities do not stack. If the weapon is not magical, at least a +1 enhancement bonus must be added before any other properties can be added.
_______________________________________________________________________
Do you see my point?
The text on Holy Sword even tells that masterwork don't stack, or spells, why not mentioning Divine Bond though it is of such obvious relevance for Paladins? IMO that´s hard to comprehend anyway.
err lack of evidence? I've already linked the official clarification that AoOs happen before the triggering action resolves.
I knew the link and its wording and take it as the clarification just for that situation there.
as clarification that the AoO, which responds to the stand up attemp, happens before the stand up is complete.
BUT I wouldn't consider it the one and only official rule for every AoO on the field.
I am aware of the part in the rules, that calls Ao0s "interrupt" the sequence of a turn:
Quote:
An attack of opportunity "interrupts" the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).
I also know the wording of the concerning feats but I agree with BigNorseWolf,
that this is far from evidence. it is a hint, it may imply that is to handle in the way You and others describe.
but even though I asume, that is probably meant this way, I regard it as kind of indefinite.
which is unnecessary cause one short sentence in the descrition would have clarified that fact.
I'd say that James Jacobs rates this feat-description as perfectly precise but at least some "unwilling" do not.
It almost seems like I'm beating a dead horse but for those who say the feat says nothing about being knocked down or prone heres a link.
I apologise for not really answering your posts, yet.
I guess it is more an understanding of the rules than an undoubtable proof of wording.
the argument, that one would not interrupt one own action for an AoO of oneself is not unreasonable IMO.
also what foghammer said sounds not bad to me.
I know the exact wording of these links of yours. but it does not contradict my understanding of the mechanism.
I learned to accept, that one could not trip someone who gets up from prone condition again.
I'd say this is a similar situation. though I would pofit from your perspektive, hence i love to trip as often as possible.
I wished, they would use unmistakable formulation in every situation.
I can see a ranger that takes humans as his 1st favored enemy and at every level that he gains a new favored enemy he pumps up humans and selects a type of creature that is REALLY unlikely to come up and/or are weak creatures, but by doing so he hinders himself until the 10th or 11th level.
what about buying a wand of instant enemy? or using scrolls ?
that would be functional before reaching 10th level.
you may get this magical trait, that lifts your casterlevel of one casterclass by two, as long as you have more charakterlevels than casterlevels.
that would lower the casterlevelcheck giving your ranger a quiet comfortable chance to cast instant enemy successfully.
granting it to your whole group with a moveaction for some rounds as long as you have chosen to bond with it instead with an animalbuddy.
but i assume, that is no longer a rulesquestion, is it?
Imagine how absolutely STUPID it would look for someone to initiate a trip, stop, hit the guy he's tripping, and THEN put him on the ground. My issue with the timing is that if you interrupt yourself, you take your AoO, then you go to trip him... wait, when he's tripped it provokes. Do I have combat reflexes? If yes, I have more AoO per round. I take another one because I'm initiating a trip.
take it this way: you succesfully trip someone, that provokes an AoO which takes place directly between the succesfull attemp and the prone condition. but you are already succesfully tripped and thus can not be tripped again to get another AoO.
In addition, you can move through a threatened square without provoking an attack of opportunity from an enemy by using Acrobatics. When moving in this way, you move at half speed. You can move at full speed by increasing the DC of the check by 10. You cannot use Acrobatics to move past foes if your speed is reduced due to carrying a medium or heavy load or wearing medium or heavy armor. If an ability allows you to move at full speed under such conditions, you can use Acrobatics to move past foes. You can use Acrobatics in this way while prone, but doing so requires a full-round action to move 5 feet, and the DC is increased by 5.
very usefull hint ! thanks.
Cult of Vorg wrote:
When you move from a threatened square, you provoke AoO that hits you in the original square, not the destination. When you AoO a spell, it interrupts the spell, not after the spell is completed. When you AoO someone standing up from prone, it hits while they're still prone. So, when you AoO someone from being greater tripped, it hits while they're still standing.
until now we have 2:2 votes and one not exactly clear one from NorseWolf. :)
anybodys oppinions or votes on the prone discussion?
Since it's been made very clear that the AoO for standing up from prone happens while they are still prone, it only makes sense to me that the AoO for a successful greater trip happens while they are still standing. Just like the AoO for movement happens while the target is still in the square leaving which provoked the attack.
i can see your point and agree with it. other voices?
No it doesn't say prone but you do have to successfully trip him. If he's not prone then you did not successfully trip him now did you and thus no you will not get your AOO. I just want to point out that I believe the guy tripped would only provoke to the tripper not everyone else until he tried to stand up. I'm pretty sure thats how that one works.
sometimes, the AoO sets in just before the accident that provokes it is happening.
this may sound strange but it seems to be the common-consens.
for example provoking for standing up from prone sets the AoO before someone gets up.
this is why you can not trip him again for getting up. there is little doubt about that ;)
so i can imagine that the AoO in this case sets in before the opponent provokes it from anybody (that he does provoke from anybody was discussed several times before in other threads too)
but how is it in this case? does it set in before the opponent is prone?
any else oppinions on that?
To answer your original question he would be prone when your first AOO is rolled as the feat describes him provoking as part of being prone. Whenever you successfully trip a target meaning he would have to be prone for him to provoke.
i´m not sure about that.
Quote:
Benefit: You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to trip a foe. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Trip. Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes attacks of opportunity.
that doesn´t say anything concerning the prone condition. doesn´t say clearly if the aoo comes before or after the knockdown. but it would serve me well, since i´m using great trip with my charakter.
i guess it is a matter of the rules. one can always change things via houserules to make them fit the own preferations. but i am interested in what is most probably the official perspective.
crawling 5 feet is a move action. not a 5'shift but a complete moveaction.
withdraw is a fullroundaction which allows moving up to two times your speed.
moving two times would cost you your standardaction and your moveaction normally.
so kind of a fullround equivalent. same for crawling 5 feet and get up, which would consume both too.
could 'withdraw' be considered two movements with the special property of withdraw the first 5' without provoking?
i mean movement-actions that are doing nothing but moving (crawling/getting up from prone).
to clarify the headline and the answer from BigNorseWolf:
kortzen wrote:
when someone provokes attacks of opportunity for being tripped by "greater trip" is he considered prone while doing so? or is he provoking them before being knocked down? haven´t found it anywhere yet.]
BigNorseWolf wrote:
yes.
so "yes." they are considered prone?
or
"yes." the opponent is provoking before beeing knocked prone? :P
thank you for the instant answer!
what about while prone, does he threat the adjacent squares while on the floor? and can he crawl away performing an withdrawaction? and if so, could he get up afterwards in the same round ?
when someone provokes attacks of opportunity for being tripped by "greater trip" is he considered prone while doing so? or is he provoking them before being knocked down? haven´t found it anywhere yet.
i apologize for my poor searching abilities, but i did not found it after some searching.
i asume that it is not the case. i read in several trip-lock threads that an AoO happens just before the the incident that triggers it.
@ DrDew. i´m very sorry for deleting the former thread unheedingly! thanks for answering. but i can not read what you wrote. i hope you did not spend too much time answering. sorry
