I've noticed some things about the "Hand of the Apprentice" of the universal school of magic that gives me a few questions. (I started looking at it since my "Improved Trip" based character who enlarges himself has just been nerfed by the new system, and I'm thinking of rebuilding him into a Socerer1/Wizard3.)
1. If the hand can draw a weapon that the character is profficient, then if the Wizard is proficient with a two handed weapon, is that wielded properly, or can it not be wielded by Hand of the Apprentice? Is the limitation also a 5lb weapon despite some indications that it is not limited in this manner?
(I do point out that the hand is strong enough to take a weapon 30' AND attack with it in the same round, and this represents a lot more than 5lbs of force.) The singular use of the word 'hand' might indicate one handed weapons, but then again it could simply represent an 'invisible force' that allows for the weapon to be wielded.)
2. If using a flail, could it make a trip or disarm attack? (Doesn't seem to be excluded in the text)
3. If my Sorcer1/Wizard3 picked his sorcer spells as Enlarge Person and True Strike, then with a martial (Or exotic) weapon proficiency of a Falchion (or Bastard sword - 6lbs) he could in the following order
A) Enlarge himself and his weapon
B) Give himself True Strike
C) Use Hand of the Apprentice to draw his now 'large' and double weight weapon to make a strike against an opponent with a 15% chance (Crit of 18-20) of 'guaranteeing' a critical hit (since the reroll to confirm the critical hit would have a +20 bonus to it as well). This "Large" weapon (Falchion) would be 2d6+IntBonus as a result.
Is this correct or am I missing something?
4. My character does #3 above after he had already used True Strike to make the his two Scorching Ray spells "automatically" ('other than a 1") hit their touch attacks. Sort of like a Magic Missile but taking two rounds to 'cast' and doing 4d6.
Does this seem a little much? That he basically becomes a 'guaranteed' "hit machine" and is likel to do more damage than a fighter who migh be nothing more than a shield for him? Or am I missing something?
5. It is like a "mage hand" but can draw a weapon, so it gets all the benefits of having a mage hand as well?
I've noticed some things about the "Hand of the Apprentice" of the universal school of magic that gives me a few questions. (I started looking at it since my "Improved Trip" based character who enlarges himself has just been nerfed by the new system, and I'm thinking of rebuilding him into a Socerer1/Wizard3.)1. If the hand can draw a weapon that the character is profficient, then if the Wizard is proficient with a two handed weapon, is that wielded properly, or can it not be wielded by Hand of the Apprentice? Is the limitation also a 5lb weapon despite some indications that it is not limited in this manner?
(I do point out that the hand is strong enough to take a weapon 30' AND attack with it in the same round, and this represents a lot more than 5lbs of force.) The singular use of the word 'hand' might indicate one handed weapons, but then again it could simply represent an 'invisible force' that allows for the weapon to be wielded.)
This is magic. :)
It can lift up 5 lbs (like someone with a 3 str), and then run with it (like a human). So... that's not the same thing as requiring the strength to throw it 30 feet, just hold it up while moving, if you think of it like that.
As to two-weapon vs one-handed... There's nothing in the description other than limit on the weight... so I'd say it's up to the GM. I can see something light like a quarterstaff being ok, since it's under 5lbs.
2. If using a flail, could it make a trip or disarm attack? (Doesn't seem to be excluded in the text)
It says it can make an attack with your certain base bonus's. Under 3.5, I'd say yes. However, in Pathfinder, Trip and Disarm are combat manuevers, and use CMB. And since the text says nothing about how to calculate the CMB for the Apprentice's Hand, I'd have to say no.
3. If my Sorcer1/Wizard3 picked his sorcer spells as Enlarge Person and True Strike, then with a martial (Or exotic) weapon proficiency of a Falchion (or Bastard sword - 6lbs) he could in the following order
A) Enlarge himself and his weapon
B) Give himself True Strike
C) Use Hand of the Apprentice to draw his now 'large' and double weight weapon to make a strike against an opponent with a 15% chance (Crit of 18-20) of 'guaranteeing' a critical hit (since the reroll to confirm the critical hit would have a +20 bonus to it as well). This "Large" weapon (Falchion) would be 2d6+IntBonus as a result.
Is this correct or am I missing something?
Nope, you're missing this :
1) Mage Hand is 5lbs. The bastard-sword is 6, too heavy (a Mithral Bastard-sword is ok)2) When you enlarge, you and your equipment are affected, but if a weapon or item is lost by you (taken by someone or something else, like say, a mage hand), then the enlarge effect is lost, ti goes back to being small.
3) The Truestrike affects your next strike, not the hands.
4) Even if the GM was generous and ruled 2 didn't apply, the doubled weapon weight would remove all but the lightest weapons from use.
4. My character does #3 above after he had already used True Strike to make the his two Scorching Ray spells "automatically" ('other than a 1") hit their touch attacks. Sort of like a Magic Missile but taking two rounds to 'cast' and doing 4d6.
Does this seem a little much? That he basically becomes a 'guaranteed' "hit machine" and is likel to do more damage than a fighter who migh be nothing more than a shield for him? Or am I missing something?
See my $0.02 above for #3.
However, even without what I typed above. Trustrike only works once, not twice, per casting.
5. It is like a "mage hand" but can draw a weapon, so it gets all the benefits of having a mage hand as well?
That's the way I read it.
Some good answers
I agree with everything Sir Mdt said.
The key is the weight limit.
As for performing CMB maneuvers with Mage Hand or with Hand of the Apprentice, if I were DMing, I would probably allow the weaponish maneuvers, like disarm and sunder, if the hand in question were wielding a weapon.
I probably would not allow the other maneuvers at all.
And I would apply the caster's CMB, and even let him substitute his INT modifier in place of STR for this particular CMB maneuver.
It seems like it might be just a little overpowered at very low levels (it's easy for a wizard to get +5 on his attacks, or in my houserule, on his CMB, but it's harder for most fighters to get that good), but they would quickly outgrow it.
Besides, it has a bit of a cinematic feel to it, like when Gandalf squared off against Saruman in Peter Jackson's The Fellowship of the Ring movie.
But that is just me, and it certainly doesn't seem to be supported by RAW.
|
Two other things to note that are limiting factors on this ability(which is still a really potent, way cool ability).
It draws the weapon as a free action, but controlling it is still a standard. So in your above example, there would have to be seperate rounds between the casting of your spell and the attack. You can move, have it draw the weapon and attack on the same round, but you cannot cast a spell and have it draw the weapon and attack. After the first round you still need to maintain concentration as well or else it just puts the weapon away.
Also, because it is done as the spell mage hand, this means you can't use it to lift magical items, so as you increase in level the wizard can't make use of any fancier weapons that you picked up that way.
Some good answersI agree with everything Sir Mdt said.
Well shucks...
Ya'll just excuse my blush...
:)
Seriously, Thanks for the compliment.
So I don’t mind the 5lb rule as it is inherently reasonable, which limits it mostly to 1-handed weapons. There should be a clarification on this in power description however.
”3) The Truestrike affects your next strike, not the hands.”
Actually the spell reads “Your next single attack roll” and since you have to concentrate on the hand to get it to attack (and it uses your intelligence bonus), it would seem that the hand itself doesn’t attack without you consciously willing it to do so (instead of taking some other action or doing nothing). If you were using spiritual weapon, then it would be off on its own while you could do something else, but this is not the case since you are making your attack with the hand. Using "Hand of the Apprentice" IS your next attack roll.
”However, in Pathfinder, Trip and Disarm are combat manuevers, and use CMB. And since the text says nothing about how to calculate the CMB for the Apprentice's Hand, I'd have to say no. “
Trip and Disarm are “Special Attacks” (P.148 Beta)
In the description of Disarm, it also says: “You can attempt to disarm your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack…“
” When you enlarge, you and your equipment are affected, but if a weapon or item is lost by you (taken by someone or something else, like say, a mage hand), then the enlarge effect is lost, it goes back to being small.”
The relevant quote would be ” Any enlarged item that leaves an enlarged creature’s possession (including a projectile or thrown weapon) instantly returns to its normal size. This means that thrown weapons deal their normal damage, and projectiles deal damage based on the size of the weapon that fired them.”
Now, if I placed the item on an Unseen Servant, it may have left my possession, although since I cast the Unseen Servant and can dismiss it or cause it to go out of range and cease to exist, one might be able to argue that by being in the possession of ‘my’ unseen servant that it was still in ‘my’ possession. But in this case, using not just 'Mage Han'd but the power "Hand of the Apprentice" I'm 'grabbing it' with my spell, and manipulating it, therefore it doens't leave my possesion.
However, since this particular manifestation of Mage Hand (called "Hand of the Apprentice") requires active concentration on my part, it is an extension of my will/efforts/consciousness; it still would be in my possession. As a matter of fact, if I STOP concentrating, it returns to where it came from, MEANING that it never leaves my possession as I have to will it to exit the scabbard. If I had a weapon that was in my hands and levitated it, would I lose ‘possession’ of it despite I’m in full control of it? (I would still posses/control the item I was levitating.)
Once I fire an arrow or throw an axe, I no longer have possession OR control, but mage hand is different – it is taking the item from point A to point B, and returning it when I stop the active concentration on having it do something else.
“ Also, because it is done as the spell mage hand, this means you can't use it to lift magical items, so as you increase in level the wizard can't make use of any fancier weapons that you picked up that way.”
I didn’t notice the ‘magic item’ part, however “Hand of the Apprentice” specifically says “including a magic weapon.”
But the last point you made is taken.
If I cast True Strike, then casting “Hand of the Apprentice” as a standard action would exceed the limit of true strike.
This is what I was missing. :-D
Also, because it is done as the spell mage hand, this means you can't use it to lift magical items, so as you increase in level the wizard can't make use of any fancier weapons that you picked up that way.
Actually, if I remember correctly, it states that you can use magical weapons with this ability. It states something like (including a magical weapon).
The relevant quote would be ” Any enlarged item that leaves an enlarged creature’s possession (including a projectile or thrown weapon) instantly returns to its normal size. This means that thrown weapons deal their normal damage, and projectiles deal damage based on the size of the weapon that fired them.”
Now, if I placed the item on an Unseen Servant, it may have left my possession, although since I cast the Unseen Servant and can dismiss it or cause it to go out of range and cease to exist, one might be able to argue that by being in the possession of ‘my’ unseen servant that it was...
In my opinion, the item is still in your control, but not in your possession, as it is not in physical contact with you.
Now, if I placed the item on an Unseen Servant, it may have left my possession, although since I cast the Unseen Servant and can dismiss it or cause it to go out of range and cease to exist, one might be able to argue that by being in the possession of ‘my’ unseen servant that it was...In my opinion, the item is still in your control, but not in your possession, as it is not in physical contact with you.
Actually, when comparing Unseen Servant to Hand of the Aprentice, the definition of 'control' can be further defined. Unseen Servant does 'tasks' that you command, but then repeats them. Meanwhile, Hand of the Aprentice requires concentration.
This leads to the idea that you are carrying a polearm, which is carrying a hankerchief. It can all be traced 'back' to you physically. Now, if the requirement of 'concentration' provides a magical (i.e. psudeo-physical) connection, then we have the problem solved.
Also, Enlarge Person says "All equipment worn or carried by a creature is similarly enlarged by the spell." Does this mean that if you are actively carrying it through 'concentration' (via an 'ability' instead of a 'spell')? Doesn't this mean that Hand of the apprentice is a "Spell Like Ability" and as such, then all items carried by 'it' are then carried by 'you?'
If it were a spell that I concentrated on, then if someone cast Enlarge Person on me, then it wouldn't enlarge the weapon in the Mage Hand, but since "Hand of the Apprentice" isn't a spell, but a spell like 'ability....?" Do you see my point?
This leads to the idea that you are carrying a polearm, which is carrying a hankerchief. It can all be traced 'back' to you physically. Now, if the requirement of 'concentration' provides a magical (i.e. psudeo-physical) connection, then we have the problem solved.Also, Enlarge Person says "All equipment worn or carried by a creature is similarly enlarged by the spell." Does this mean that if you are actively carrying it through 'concentration' (via an 'ability' instead of a 'spell')? Doesn't this mean that Hand of the apprentice is a "Spell Like Ability" and as such, then all items carried by 'it' are then carried by 'you?'
If it were a spell that I concentrated on, then if someone cast Enlarge Person on me, then it wouldn't enlarge the weapon in the Mage Hand, but since "Hand of the Apprentice" isn't a spell, but a spell like 'ability....?" Do you see my point?
I would be careful about the whole 'magically connected to hand' thought. First off, if that's true, I'd say that the connection allows spells to be channeled into you. A touch spell delivered to the weapon could channel down the 'psudeo-physical' link and into you. Just like a touch spell can be channeled down the hankerchief into the polearm into your body.
I still don't think an enlarged weapon would work once it left your physical control (goes back to the idea of an Aura around you). That Aura can extend out around a weapon, but not 30 feet away to something else.
Even if it did work, most weapons when doubled would be more than the weight of the spell.
Actually the spell reads “Your next single attack roll” and since you have to concentrate on the hand to get it to attack (and it uses your intelligence bonus), it would seem that the hand itself doesn’t attack without you consciously willing it to do so (instead of taking some other action or doing nothing). If you were using spiritual weapon, then it would be off on its own while you could do something else, but this is not the case since you are making your attack with the hand. Using "Hand of the Apprentice" IS your next attack roll.
Not sure about that, but it's a moot point, as someone else pointed out about the timing on the spells.
”However, in Pathfinder, Trip and Disarm are combat manuevers, and use CMB. And since the text says nothing about how to calculate the CMB for the Apprentice's Hand, I'd have to say no. “Trip and Disarm are “Special Attacks” (P.148 Beta)
In the description of Disarm, it also says: “You can attempt to disarm your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack…“
Not arguing that. I guess I should have been more clear. Even when combining the Trip or Disarm with an attack, it requires a CMB check, it's not part of the attack roll itself. The hand still has no CMB to make the check with.
"Even if it did work, most weapons when doubled would be more than the weight of the spell."
I agree with you there.
"The hand still has no CMB to make the check with."
CMB is STR + BAB + Size - therefore the hand has BAB and would be (even if enlarged) medium sized which is simply an assumption, however "Hand of the Apprentice" uses Intelligence in the roll of strength in terms of both To Hit and Bonus Damage, so it would seem that it would add to the BAB.
I've noticed some things about the "Hand of the Apprentice" of the universal school of magic that gives me a few questions.
This thread should help. Please ignore most of the speculation already presented in this thread, as they contradict Jason :)
I've noticed some things about the "Hand of the Apprentice" of the universal school of magic that gives me a few questions.This thread should help. Please ignore most of the speculation already presented in this thread, as they contradict Jason :)
Ah,
Thanks!