Would a ravage work like a poison?
Specifically:
From BoED
Touch of Golden Ice: Contact DC14, Init 1d6 DEX + targets CHA mod, Sec 2d6 + targets CHA mod.
Pathfinder mod:
Contact DC14, 1d3 DEX + 1/2 CHA mod, 6 rd duration, 1 save cures.
This is a good deal more powerful than in the BoED since a monk with this on could hit an opponent 8 times bringing the DC to 20 and duration to 13 rounds.
Would a ravage work like a poison?
Specifically:
From BoEDTouch of Golden Ice: Contact DC14, Init 1d6 DEX + targets CHA mod, Sec 2d6 + targets CHA mod.
Pathfinder mod:
Contact DC14, 1d3 DEX + 1/2 CHA mod, 6 rd duration, 1 save cures.
This is a good deal more powerful than in the BoED since a monk with this on could hit an opponent 8 times bringing the DC to 20 and duration to 13 rounds.
Long and the short: Ravages work like poisons, afflictions work like diseases. The only difference is that good characters can use Ravages and Afflictions without needing to worry about the DM deeming their acts as "evil", because poison use and hitting people with diseases is suppose to be classified as an evil act.
This is because ravages are like holy poisons, given to good PCs by higher powers that are meant to affect evil beings. And afflictions are Holy plagues brought down upon the wicked, to punish them for their evil ways.
(but mechanically there is little difference between the two)
So yes: Ravages are Poisons. Their just divinely bless exalted poisons meant for the evil of society.
So the feat gives a "good" poison on every attack. With all the increases in poison effect I don't see how this can be balanced without some limitations in uses or a cost of Ki points.
So the feat gives a "good" poison on every attack. With all the increases in poison effect I don't see how this can be balanced without some limitations in uses or a cost of Ki points.
The limitation is that Ravages only effect "evil creatures". Creatures who's alignment are evil or have the evil subtype.
The feat as is simply states:
Any ***EVIL*** creature you touch with your bare hand, fist, or natural weapon is ravaged by golden ice.
There are two important restricting factors to this feat:
1: Its EXALTED. Meaning not only does your monk have to be good, in theory he/she must aspire to be a pinnacle of virtue. Anyone can be good aligned, few are exalted.
I have played many clerics over the years, few if any were "Exalted" save for one and the difference were astounding. Regular clerics serve their deity, tend to their flock, spread the word. Exalted does all that but goes beyond just these simple duties. She was altruistically good. Gave up all wealth and worldly possessions. When the party stayed at the inn, she found the slums and offered free healing. In the face of you everyday evil she fought for redemption rather than damnation, even sometimes coming to odds with members of her own party. Against true evil, she would give her own life in the service of her deity to see its destruction.
The basic principle of Exalted is this: You're not just good. You are suppose to be a shinning exemplar of the purest virtues of good within your world. And if you can't do that everyday, then you're not exalted, and you can't take said feat.
2: It only affects evil creatures. This places a HUGE restriction on its use. How many monsters are listed as "Neutral". How many are animal like. This means that this ability is only useful against things that are evil aligned or have the evil subtype. Its like the Paladin's smite evil ability. Awesome against evil, useless against everything else.
All that being said, while yes its a poison and can be treated as such, its not a poison, its a ravage. Thus you can't drop it on anything that's not evil, that's what makes ravages and afflictions different from poisons and diseases. Its less about Ki points and class features and more about the magical nature of ravages and afflictions and thus how they ultimately are applicable in the game world. If your party rarely fights anything "evil" this is a wasted feat slot. If you're going into the 9 hells to kick ass, then you'll see a lot of mileage off this feat.
And the important thing to remember is that exalted feats are not as balanced as regular feats. This was done intentionally. Namely because they can only be taken by exalted characters, and they are geared heavily towards fighting against evil, or rewarding said exalted characters with bonuses/abilities that help them combat the tactics and abilities of the evil which they fight against.
Poisons delivered by injury and cannot inflict more than one dose of poison at a time.
Ravage: Touch of Golden Ice = Contact
thus escalating save DC for poisons, does not apply.
because poison use and hitting people with diseases is suppose to be classified as an evil act.
Not true, actually, at least according to the Book of Vile Darkness.
because poison use and hitting people with diseases is suppose to be classified as an evil act.Not true, actually, at least according to the Book of Vile Darkness.
Really? checking
(few minutes later)
I stand corrected, and bow to your superior knowledge as my memory decided to fail me. Happens from time to time.
I know that somewhere it is suggested that using any poison or disease to cause ability damage "should be considered an evil act" by the DM. But I believe you are correct, and that this a false perception rather than a rule.
It just happens that evil characters tend to use poisons and diseases more frequently because despite poison's and disease's neutral nature, they kill indiscriminately, regardless of alignment.
Ravages and Afflictions only affect evil creatures.
Still the point to the original poster is this:
-Only affects evil creatures
-Touch of Gold Ice is a contact poison, and as stated earlier, injury and contact poisons can only be applied once, and thus are not subject the increasing save DC of ingested/injected poisons.
-Thus while you can wail away on some evil creature with touch of golden ice, and every hit will force a fort save, those saves should always be at DC: 14, which most evil fiends and critters should be able to make fairly easily.
It just happens that evil characters tend to use poisons and diseases more frequently because despite poison's and disease's neutral nature, they kill indiscriminately, regardless of alignment.
Ravages and Afflictions only affect evil creatures.
Still the point to the original poster is this:
-Only affects evil creatures
-Touch of Gold Ice is a contact poison, and as stated earlier, injury and contact poisons can only be applied once, and thus are not subject the increasing save DC of ingested/injected poisons.
-Thus while you can wail away on some evil creature with touch of golden ice, and every hit will force a fort save, those saves should always be at DC: 14, which most evil fiends and critters should be able to make fairly easily.
Oh, absolutely. Wasn't intending to counter your point, just correct an error. In general, yes, a poisoner or plague-monger is almost always going to be evil. It's just that they're going to be evil because of what they do, rather than what they do it with. And don't feel too bad, I looked that up myself :)
-Touch of Gold Ice is a contact poison, and as stated earlier, injury and contact poisons can only be applied once, and thus are not subject the increasing save DC of ingested/injected poisons.
-Thus while you can wail away on some evil creature with touch of golden ice, and every hit will force a fort save, those saves should always be at DC: 14, which most evil fiends and critters should be able to make fairly easily.Are you sure about that? The example in the PRD has 3 monstrous spiders all attacking and delivering poison. Contact poison can be used as injury when attacking with it (presuming a real attack roll rather than a touch attack). Thus, multiple hits in the same round should be the same as multiple opponents attacking. Otherwise, would an assassin with rapid shot and poisoned arrows never be able to deliver more than one dose a round?
This doesn't seem to be in line with that the rules intended. otherwise, 2 assassins can make 1 shot and deliver 2 doses, but 1 assassin can fire 4 shots and only deliver 1 dose.
I seems to me every attack from the monk applies a dose.
Poisons delivered by injury and contact cannot inflict more than one dose of poison at a time, but inhaled and ingested poisons can inflict multiple doses at once.
This means that two monks/assassins, or whatever, can apply a ***contact or injury*** poison as much as they like. The down side is that each time its applied its always against the same saving throw DC. So you hit 3 times, your target must save 3 times vs the same save DC, which in the case of "Touch of Golden Ice" would be DC: 14.
While this is not the same as a cumulative increasing save DC, it does statistically increase the chance of a contact/injury poison working. You don't just make 1 save to beat the poison, you have to make multiple saves vs every does. While the saves may be of a lower DC, eventually, at least from a statistical stand point, you will eventually fail a saving throw.
Now with regards to the example printed in the pathfinder RPG on the same page, in the same paragraph, I'm going to error on the side of caution and say that this is an error.
My reason for this is that the example contradicts the written rules. I don't know if someone simply wasn't paying attention or forgot. But in my experience, you take the written rule, over the example, just like with class abilities, the printed text for the class ability supersedes the table.
Good example, Rainbow Servant out of complete Divine. The table shows half caster progression, the written text states full caster progression. When asked for clarification, Wizards stated that the rainbow servant had full casting progression due to the text printed to describe the ability, which supersedes the table.
So using that logic, I would say the Medium Spider venom was an incorrectly sited example as it contradicts the original rules for poison use.
Poisons delivered by injury and contact cannot inflict more than one dose of poison at a time, but inhaled and ingested poisons can inflict multiple doses at once.This means that two monks/assassins, or whatever, can apply a ***contact or injury*** poison as much as they like. The down side is that each time its applied its always against the same saving throw DC. So you hit 3 times, your target must save 3 times vs the same save DC, which in the case of "Touch of Golden Ice" would be DC: 14.
While this is not the same as a cumulative increasing save DC, it does statistically increase the chance of a contact/injury poison working. You don't just make 1 save to beat the poison, you have to make multiple saves vs every does. While the saves may be of a lower DC, eventually,...
Actually, the whole sentence says:
"Unlike other afflictions, multiple doses of the same poison stack. Poisons delivered by injury and contact cannot inflict more than one dose of poison at a time, but inhaled and ingested poisons can inflict multiple doses at once."
This basically says that every time you are hit by an attack that deals ***contact or injury*** poison, you take only one dose per attack, while if you ingest poison or inhale poison you could theoretically gain more than one dose at once (for example, you could say that the food you are eating is so laced with arsenic that after eating one single morsel you gain 3 doses of poison at once).
Just my 2c.
Right: all I'm saying is that the Save DC doesn't increase. But you still have to make multiple saves vs each strike you take.
Right: all I'm saying is that the Save DC doesn't increase. But you still have to make multiple saves vs each strike you take.But then again:
Unlike other afflictions, multiple doses of the same poison stack. Poisons delivered by injury and contact cannot inflict more than one dose of poison at a time, but inhaled and ingested poisons can inflict multiple doses at once. Each additional dose...Multiple doses stack. Injury poisons inflict doses one at a time. An assassin fires 4 poison arrows, all hit.
If, as you say, the DC is not increased, then they are NOT being hit by multiple doses. Thus, they only need to make 1 save. If they have to make more than 1 save, then they ARE being hit by multiple doses, and they make a single save, but the DC is increased.
I don't see where a third option is available for multiple doses without increasing the DC. Either it's multiple doses or not.
Perhaps its the way that I'm interpreting the rules.
But as I read them the only case where multiple doses stack is in the case of inhaled and ingested poisons. Injury and contact poisons cannot inflict more than one does of poison at a time. So you can hit someone 5 times with ToGI. Its not treated as multiple doses where the save DC continues to increase. But for every time the target is struck with ToGI, he has to make a DC 14 FORT save against each individual attack, thus its still just one dose per hit.
The difference I'm seeing it multiple hits with with contact/injury poisons forces a saving throw for each hit.
Ingested/Inhaled poisons can have multiple doses applied at once, and thus their save DC's stack up. The advantage to these poisons is that they can create a ridiculous saving throw DC. The disadvantage is that the target only has to make 1 saving throw to negate all the poison in their system.
Literally it becomes a case of pick your poison. Do you want to force a saving throw per hit, albeit at a lower save, but knowing that the more hits you make, the more likely the target is to be affected by the poison.
Or...
Do you prefer to hit someone with a poison that forces 1 saving throw, but based on how much you can put into their system, determines how difficult that save is to make.
This is really one of those cases where I feel the wording was not the best in the PFRPG. It leaves itself open to a lot of interpretation. The only reason I see it this way is that according to your interpretation contact/injury poisons become ridiculously powerful. Because you can continue to strike someone with arrows or crossbow bolts per round, and forcing multiple saves for each hit of poison, AND increasing the save DC per hit to a point where the target cannot make their saving throw.
Under that interpretation why would you ever bother to use inhaled or ingested poisons. They require too much setup to pull off. It would just be easier to hammer someone with multiple ranged attacks, using contact/injury poisons, until they fail their saving throw. Their has to be some balancing factor, a reason why you would choose to use an inhaled or ingested poison vs a contact or injury poison.
Ultimately we can debate this all day. Its really a matter of rules interpretation. If you want a clear answer this would be one of those cases where I would post this question in the FQA forum and see if any pathfinder official will comment. Or suggest it for review and possible errata.
-AK
its actually moot because in PF, Contact poisons take a full minute to take first effect, so ToGI is useless in combat.
Edit: oooooh ZOMBIE thread!