|
Questions for the King when he Returns:
Reiterating my thoughts on another post, we have a mage/thief.
Can HotA be used to sneak attack?
- what if the caster is in concealment, but the hand is not?
- what if the hand is in concealment but the caster is not?
Can HotA get the benefit of a flank?
- How's this relate to sneak attack
Does the hand moving within a threatened area or into the opponents space provoke an AoO?
Can it be grappled?
Can it be disarmed?
Can the weapon it's holding be sundered? What DC/CMB?
Can it be attacked with a force effect, etc.
Ah, D&D physics. I'll have to tell the story of the gnomish underwater parachute sometime.
Can HotA get the benefit of a flank?
The answer to this is clearly no - it does not threaten, so it cannot flank.
Everything else? No clue.
|
Again I am wondering why the spell itself needs a standard action to attack. When a druid sicks his animal companion on someone it doesn't use the druids actions for the attack. When a wizard casts magic Missile it does not need an action for every missile to attack. For a touch spell it does not require the casting of the spell and then an additional action to make the touch attack.
Why is this spell separated from all other spells in the game with special more limiting rules?
It is not - I believe the issue is you're trying to liken it erroneously to something that has free will (animal comp.) or separate/personal locomotion (magic missile) from something that is being controlled like a puppet.
The animal companion gets its own set of moves because it is a living creature. It has its own standard action to use for an attack - having it go on the Druids action just makes it easier for people to keep track of. The magic missile is targeted from creation and only has one outcome which it does automatically.
HotA does nothing unless concentrated on, which means you're using it as an extension of your body and it is not animated independently of the caster. The caster has to sink their own standard action making it attack - they are treated as the same action and you only get one of those a round. If the act of bringing it into existance takes the one standard the caster has, you have to wait until a time when you have another standard to use for an attack - hence the next round.
I just don't agree with this at all... I did at first much earlier. The I tried to stop analyzing the spell and just treat it like a spell without trying to figure out the mechanics of the spell.
Its like the Spectral hand example earlier. Someone is over analyzing how it works and the way it works. Quite simply when it cast a spell the act of the casting also makes the spell do what it does. When you concentrate on a spell, that act makes it do what it does.
By the way I cannot think of a single spell that grows in power the longer you sit and hold it. I don't know every spell by heart, so please forgive me. Can you remind me of one that works that way so I can compare it?
|
|
Questions for the King when he Returns:Reiterating my thoughts on another post, we have a mage/thief.
Can HotA be used to sneak attack?
- what if the caster is in concealment, but the hand is not?
- what if the hand is in concealment but the caster is not?
Can HotA get the benefit of a flank?
- How's this relate to sneak attack
Does the hand moving within a threatened area or into the opponents space provoke an AoO?
Can it be grappled?
Can it be disarmed?
Can the weapon it's holding be sundered? What DC/CMB?
Can it be attacked with a force effect, etc.Ah, D&D physics. I'll have to tell the story of the gnomish underwater parachute sometime.
OK OK I'll bite... quick side trek here as I must know about the gnomish underwater parachute.
By the way I cannot think of a single spell that grows in power the longer you sit and hold it. I don't know every spell by heart, so please forgive me. Can you remind me of one that works that way so I can compare it?
I seem to remember there was one or two that actually did work like this in Complete Mage, but I couldn't tell you straight away what they did.
By the way I cannot think of a single spell that grows in power the longer you sit and hold it. I don't know every spell by heart, so please forgive me. Can you remind me of one that works that way so I can compare it?
Well Chill Metal does, but that's not a concentration spell.
There's Detect Evil:You can sense the presence of evil. The amount of information revealed
depends on how long you study a particular area or subject.
1st Round: Presence or absence of evil.
2nd Round: Number of evil auras (creatures, objects, or spells) in the
area and the power of the most potent evil aura present.
If you are of good alignment, and the strongest evil aura’s power is
overwhelming (see below), and the HD or level of the aura’s source is
at least twice your character level, you are stunned for 1 round and the
spell ends.
3rd Round: The power and location of each aura. If an aura is outside
your line of sight, then you discern its direction but not its exact
location.
Most of the Detect Spells work this way.
Interesting question on Implosion. It states
"This spell causes a destructive resonance in a corporeal creature’s
body. Each round you concentrate (including the first), you can cause
one creature to collapse in on itself, inflicting 10 points of damage per
caster level. If you break concentration the spell immediately ends"
First round of concentration? ie Casting round, or first round after?
Storm of Vengeance
This spell creates an enormous black storm cloud. Lightning and crashing
claps of thunder appear within the storm. Each creature beneath the cloud
must succeed on a Fortitude save or be deafened for 1d4x10 minutes.
If you do not maintain concentration on the spell after casting it, the
spell ends. If you continue to concentrate, the spell generates additional
effects in each following round, as noted below. Each effect occurs during
your turn.
2nd Round: Acid rains down in the area, dealing 1d6 points of acid
damage (no save).
3rd Round: You call six bolts of lightning down from the cloud. You
decide where the bolts strike. No two bolts may be directed at the same
target. Each bolt deals 10d6 points of electricity damage. A creature struck
can attempt a Reflex save for half damage.
4th Round: Hailstones rain down in the area, dealing 5d6 points of
bludgeoning damage (no save).
5th through 10th Rounds: Violent rain and wind gusts reduce visibility.
The rain obscures all sight, including darkvision, beyond 5 feet. A creature
5 feet away has concealment (attacks have a 20% miss chance). Creatures
farther away have total concealment (50% miss chance, and the attacker
cannot use sight to locate the target). Speed is reduced by three-quarters
|
|
OK OK I'll bite... quick side trek here as I must know about the gnomish underwater parachute.
Ah, D&D physics. I'll have to tell the story of the gnomish underwater parachute sometime.
Ok, promise not to derail the thread, but it remains the most ridiculous D&D physics experiment ever.
Underwater movement is unimpeded when wearing a ring of free action (or was in 1st edition). Giant crayfish grabs the fighter and pulls him deep into the water. The paladin, wearing the ring of free action and about 100 lbs of plate mail and equipment, leaps into the water to save him. Deep water. I adjudicate (probably improperly, but we had little guidance in those days) that she sinks like a rock without the benefit of drag from the water due to the ring of free action.
Meanwhile, Paladin has taken the precaution of telling the gnomish thief and elven wizard to hold a rope that is tied to her waist. Together, soaking wet, the thief and wizard weigh about 120 lbs. The end result of her free fall and two failed strength checks? They are pulled into the water as well.
HOWEVER, they are not wearing rings of free action, and are effected by the drag from the water.
The end result? The gnome and elf effectively act as a parachute, underwater, slowing the paladin's descent enough to avoid damage, letting her land safely and kill the crayfish and save the fighter.
The gnomish underwater parachute. Now THAT's D&D Physics.
OK, here is another question. What about using a longbow with this power? Assuming I keep the HOTA with the bow next to me, how does it handle ammo?
I ask because my first Pathfinder RPG char (starting this sunday) is going to be an Elven Wizard who uses a bow. Using the HOTA, I can get int bonus damage to my bow attacks, instead of applying my negative str bonus to damage.
A bow takes two hands to use. It's Hand of the Apprentice, not Hands. So, I don't think HotA can use it.
A bow takes two hands to use. It's Hand of the Apprentice, not Hands. So, I don't think HotA can use it.
*cough* crossbow *cough*
A light crossbow is 4 pounds and can be fired in one hand, but can't be reloaded one-handed. Still, reloading is a move action, and concentrating is a standard... it could work. I'd stick with darts, though, if you wanted to go missile. Weird mental image either way.
I think the hand could perform a sneak attack if the target were flat-footed or otherwise denied their dex bonus. Being flanked is the most common way to deliver sneak attacks, but not the only way.
As written, it doesn't seem to be able to disarm or perform any combat maneuvers. Allow flanking seems like a bad plan, but maybe there could be a feat to allow the hand to make AoO's...
Just a note for the powers that be: my players are demanding answers. If this goes much longer, there will be a stigma permanently assigned to this power, as playtester houserules and final rulings conflict... please break the silence.
A light crossbow is 4 pounds and can be fired in one hand, but can't be reloaded one-handed. Still, reloading is a move action, and concentrating is a standard... it could work. I'd stick with darts, though, if you wanted to go missile. Weird mental image either way.
Can you reload someone else's light crossbow? Is that an action anyone has ever dealt with? Because if you think about it, reloading would take two hands.
Can you reload someone else's light crossbow? Is that an action anyone has ever dealt with? Because if you think about it, reloading would take two hands.
I think it could be done, but only because the hand doesn't take up that much physical space. You'd have the hand floating in midair, holding the crossbow as if to fire it. The wizard would step over and use two hands to pull the lever back and recock the crossbow, and then add another arrow. Next round, the hand could fire again.
For darts, the wizard would have to put a dart into the 'hand' each round as a move action.
As I said, weird mental image.
For darts, the wizard would have to put a dart into the 'hand' each round as a move action.
Couldn't the HotA take the darts from the mages posession as a free action? I think it could, RAW.
Couldn't the HotA take the darts from the mages posession as a free action? I think it could, RAW.
I was thinking that depended on whether the hand gets an attack the first round or not. As written, the hand only draws a weapon as a free action when it's summoned - so the wizard would technically have to resummon it every round to get the darts as a free action.
But it is a mage hand, so I suppose it could grab the darts itself - probably as a move action rather than a free?
I was thinking that depended on whether the hand gets an attack the first round or not. As written, the hand only draws a weapon as a free action when it's summoned - so the wizard would technically have to resummon it every round to get the darts as a free action.
But it is a mage hand, so I suppose it could grab the darts itself - probably as a move action rather than a free?
i think that makes the most sense, tergiver. free action upon casting to draw, move action to acquire the dart after.
*bump*
*bump*
*sigh* Sadly our patience has gone unrewarded. :(
Again, for paizo, I realize the beta reporting isn't on the Magic Section yet - but we're not discussing changes to the ability or the merits and power of the ability. That's what we will be discussing when we get to the Magic section.
The problem is, we can't formulate suggested changes or evaluate the merits of this ability until we actually know what HotA does. Otherwise when it comes to the Magic section, by the time we get to playtest whatever the answer is - the beta evaluation will have moved on.
We just want to know how HotA is meant to work. Then we can let you know how it playtests.
:(
Almost a month now... I'm gonna say that HotA can attack when it's summoned and move and attack after a concentration check and that it can move 30' on the first turn and per turn.
Based on everything I've seen, this acts like a Sword of Deception/Mordenkainen's Sword/Persistent Blade/Steeldance. The descriptions all vary, based on which version you use. Since it doesn't threaten, the biggest questions to answer are
a) does it get iterative attacks, like Sword of Deception?
b) how quickly does it move? Like Mage Hand, or like these other spells?
I would say that it gets one attack/round and moves the full 30ft/round. Otherwise, it's not as useful to a wizard that doesn't want to be that close.
For the record, I think GMs should choose whether this ability functions like Sword of Deception (threatening, only doing the weapon damage, and having iterative attacks based on caster level) or 1/round with all bonuses. I understand that weapon damage and INT bonuses are scalable, but not to the same degree that the Conjuration/Evocation abilities are. If the principle is to be a regularly usable ability for all your days, then it should be more dramatically scalable in some regard. Perhaps it adds iterative attacks as you gain them? Not like you'll get many...
Almost a month now... I'm gonna say that HotA can attack when it's summoned and move and attack after a concentration check and that it can move 30' on the first turn and per turn.
Why would there be a concentration check?
Almost a month now... I'm gonna say that HotA can attack when it's summoned and move and attack after a concentration check and that it can move 30' on the first turn and per turn.Why would there be a concentration check?
The same reason that the developers left the description ambiguous... I don't know. =P
|
|
So Hand of the Acolyte, I just checked, is a Supernatural ability.
Under Spell-like Ability, both in Pathfinder and the SRD, there are all sorts of details about how they have no Verbal, Somatic and Material components, purely mental action, yadda-yadda.
Under Supernatural Ability, shiny, shiny BUPKISS. I have no idea whether a Cleric with the Magic Domain or a Universalist Wizard with Hand of the Apprentice uses any sort of Verbal or Somatic Components to activate this Supernatural ability, since Supernatural abilities aren't as commonly based off of spells (that's what Spell-likes are for).
[Action item, I guess. Define what the heck a Supernatural ability is? Or are they all unique enough that no one description can fit them, unlike Spell-like abilities?]
Mage Hand is described as an invisible telekinetic force, while Hand of the Apprentice (and Hand of the Acolyte) is described as a 'ghostly hand.' Is that a visible ghostly hand? Is that flavor text?
Mage Hand as a Spell has V and S components, and since HotA (either version) acts as Mage Hand 'with the following changes,' I guess it's possible that Hand of the Apprentice requires V and S components, even if Supernatural abilities generally don't?
Oh, what a pain in the rump this one power is!
Jason opened up cleric design comments to include domain comments. I have posted a "please explain Hand of the Acolyte" in there. Hopefully we'll get an answer finally, since its pretty much the same ability.
Rather discouraging to watch this ability not get official attention from Jason in a month. If this is the rack Paizo wants to hang their hats on, they'd better show more overt interest in quality-control. If Jason doesn't have 5 minutes in a month to clarify HotA, how are we not not assume the product as a whole is suffering from neglect.
We need answers to fundamental questions like this a heck of a lot more than we need Prestige Classes hammered out.
Rather discouraging to watch this ability not get official attention from Jason in a month. If this is the rack Paizo wants to hang their hats on, they'd better show more overt interest in quality-control. If Jason doesn't have 5 minutes in a month to clarify HotA, how are we not not assume the product as a whole is suffering from neglect.
We need answers to fundamental questions like this a heck of a lot more than we need Prestige Classes hammered out.
I was pretty optimistic that we'd get a firm clarification from jason in the cleric HotA thread but alas, no.
:(
We need answers to fundamental questions like this a heck of a lot more than we need Prestige Classes hammered out.
While I disagree that this reflects on the state of the project as a whole, I second the idea that the first level ability of a universalist wizard is a higher priority than prestige classes by far.
Fully 1/3 or more of all Pathfinder games being played right now have a character with this ability. House-rules on the issue are proliferating. This is really important to ongoing playtests!
By contrast, I don't even allow PrCs in my game. That's DMG stuff.
Don't forget spacing.
This has come up in the past. Can you send the weapon through occupied spaces? Can it occupy the space as another character while making it's attack? How does it fight in a crowded corridor?
A previous comment Jason made suggested that a medium sized weapon might require a 5' space to make its attack, while a small weapon like a dagger can co-exist with a character or NPC in an occupied space while attacking.
Did we ever get a good answer for this?
Did we ever get a good answer for this?
Nope.
Jason? Are you out there? Hello? Is this thing on?
|
This is how I adjudicated this for my group:
HotA does not threaten so it does not sneak attack(due to flank), flank, AoO. However anything you can do with a melee attack you can do with HotA providing you have the requisite feat.
In my campaign the wizard is an elf so she is proficient in swords thus if she has a sword on her she can use HotA to attack. In addition if she were to take feats such as power attack, improved sunder, sneak attack an opponent denied dex etc she can apply those feats/abilites to the melee attack.
As to the functionality of the ability, its been pretty well covered in this thread but I'll cover the highlights:
HotA is a (Su) ability that does not provoke AoO, it requires a standard action to summon the hand, after which the caster needs to concentrate to keep it up, in this case all the wizard can do each round is a move equivalent action each round. However once the hand is summoned it can be used to make melee attacks against any opponent within 30' (with line of sight and line of effect). In my campaign I ruled that given all the above the attack begins and end at the casters position, there is no flying weapon around for someone to grapple, bat out of the air etc. However this doesn't prevent someone from readying an action to do so on the casters turn. Simply put this is a melee attack that the caster can do from the safety of distance thus limiting there exposure to danger but still being able to contribute in a combat situation.
The question really comes down to game play balance as it always does. My campaign is still early so the PCs are lvls 1 and 2 and so the casters are still finding them selves out of spells early on, and so instead of just standing there like a fifth wheel, or trying to hit with a crossbow (without precise shot), they can contribute to the partys success to a limited degree. I think it has been pointed out earlier in the thread that the ability does not scale with level, eventually the caster will have better things they can do with the one rounds worth of actions than taking a swing in melee. It goes with the theme of alot of the first lvl domain/school powers in that they help the PCs over that lvls 1-3 hump before they can hold their own. If you don't think its enough then go play 4th ed if you think its OP go play 3.5 or earlier versions of DnD.
Please see my post from today (Octover 7th, 2008) in the Acolyte Thread.
The topics are inter-related but I didn't want to cross post.
HotA is a (Su) ability that does not provoke AoO, it requires a standard action to summon the hand, after which the caster needs to concentrate to keep it up, in this case all the wizard can do each round is a move equivalent action each round. However once the hand is summoned it can be used to make melee attacks against any opponent within 30' (with line of sight and line of effect).In my campaign I ruled that given all the above the attack begins and end at the casters position, there is no flying weapon around for someone to grapple, bat out of the air etc. However this doesn't prevent someone from readying an action to do so on the casters turn. Simply put this is a melee attack that the caster can do from the safety of distance thus limiting there exposure to danger but still being able to contribute in a combat situation.
This is how we judged it in my current campaign as this seemed to best fall in line with the other wizard abilities. Other spells have been called as a reference to how it should work, but I think the one I've found best is treating it as a 'one target' "Whirling Blade". The melee weapon goes out, and attacks once (using any applicable feats you posess) and returns. By maintaining the concentration, you are esentially re-casting the spell every round.
The question really comes down to game play balance as it always does. My campaign is still early so the PCs are lvls 1 and 2 and so the casters are still finding them selves out of spells early on, and so instead of just standing there like a fifth wheel, or trying to hit with a crossbow (without precise shot), they can contribute to the partys success to a limited degree. I think it has been pointed out earlier in the thread that the ability does not scale with level, eventually the caster will have better things they can do with the one rounds worth of actions than taking a swing in melee. It goes with the theme of alot of the first lvl domain/school powers in that they help the PCs over that lvls 1-3 hump before they can hold their own. If you don't think its enough then go play 4th ed if you think its OP go play 3.5 or earlier versions of DnD.
As to balance, it was quite shocking to have my wizard doing 1d8+4 at first level, a number which matched our fighter. Also, as expected, the difference in damage grew as we leveled, with the fighter easily overtaking my paltry damage by 3rd or 4th level. A suggestion was voiced to cap the contrubition by Intelligece to the wizards level, letting the fighter maintain his place as 'melee prime' but retain the end effect of the wizard's ability.
**Note, I know that the Pathfinder staff cannot reference non-OGL material. My reference to "Whirling Blade" would therefore never be seen should they decide to change the effect's reference from "Mage Hand" to one of the other suggested spells.
If Jason doesn't have 5 minutes in a month to clarify HotA, how are we not not assume the product as a whole is suffering from neglect.
My impression is that Jason is an ideas man. He's not a technical writer, and he doesn't do editing; he does class and game design -- and he does it well. Hopefully Paizo will set loose a rabid, half-starved cadre of anal-retentive editorial monsters on the manuscript before the hardcover is published... people who will dot the i's, cross the t's, change the mentions of "level" to "class/character/caster/spell level" as appropriate, emphasize that Mystic Theurge levels do not give you access to new school/bloodline/domain powers, make sure that "enchantment" remains a school of magic (and not a catchall for Craft Wand feats and the like), clarify how things actually work, clarify what's descriptive fluff and what's actual mechanics (I'm pretty sure you can't destroy a HotA with channeled positive energy, but then again, it is "ghostly"...), etc.
|
Jason talked about it in this thread which was, appropriately, in the Wizard and Sorceror focus forum. I guess that questions arising from playtests don't fit very well into the two-wwkly focus model (they are most likely to be too early, or too late).
|
Huh.
I've been running it like this:
Wizard casts Hand of the Apprentice, which draws weapon as a free action and hurls the weapon through the air, up to 30', and attacks the foe. I assumed the intent -- and I almost always rule according to perceived intent, because anything else is just seems anal and obnoxious to me -- was to give the Universalist a reliable (i.e. at will) combat ability that roughly matched the combat abilities of other 1st level at will powers, which tend to be in the
If the wizard wants to change targets, or the target runs away, moving the weapon functions just like Mage Hand. And the Wizard can attack people further than 30' away, up to the range of Mage Hand. Moving the 15'is a move action, attacking is a standard action. And if he breaks concentration, the weapon flies back at high speed and returns to it's sheath.
So an INT 15 Human Wizard 1 could move 30' and then attack an orc 30' away with his Long Sword at +2 to hit for 1d8+2 damage. If he kills the orc, on the next round he could move the sword up to 15' and attack another orc. Or he could break concentration, have the weapon fly back to him, move 30', and attack another orc within 30'.
I imagine it as a vastly improved Mage Hand that has the programmed ability to draw a weapon (which it "borrows' from the Wizard, hence the need for proficiency with the weapon), and fly it in a straight line into a foe, and then zip it back to it's sheath -- all in one round.
It should be limited to light weapons, really. If used with a short sword, it's essentially no different than any of the other 1st level abilities that give the caster a 1d6+(level/2) touch attack up to 30' every round. But even the extra damage of a long sword is pretty well balanced by the fact that it's a regular attack and affected by DR.