I believe I know the answer to this; just wanted to see if there was any dissenting opinion:
Does a shadow's touch automatically drain STR, or is that choice up to the shadow? In other words, can a shadow touch a living creature and not drain STR? (Being incorporeal, he can't push, lift or otherwise interact with the creature, so I'm not sure what the point of a non-draining touch would be, but...)
From the SRD:
Supernatural Abilities (Su)
Using a supernatural ability is usually a standard action (unless defined otherwise by the ability's description). Its use cannot be disrupted, does not require concentration, and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Doesn't say otherwise in the Bestiary description of Shadow, so it appears that intent (by use of a standard action) is required and a Shadow could touch a living creature without harm, though it's unclear why it should want to.
I don't know if it can be turned off or not. I don't think it was something the developer's thought of since the sole purpose of the monster by design is to drain strength. This one most likely falls into the "DM Decision" category.
Howie23's impression seems right to me. I would clarify, though, that a Shadow's attack does STR damage, not drain. These are two different, clearly defined terms. I actually had to look up Shadows to make sure my memory wasn't failing me...
Not to be nitpicky or anything.
A touch attack is an attack, not just casual contact. The attack is required. Casual contact would not result in drain.
Good point. I assumed a touch attack for the purpose of touching, but trying to not drain strength.
Damon we need more info on the touch. Is the monster merely passing through the person's body which definitely count's as touching, but would not activate the shadow drain or something different.
A touch attack is an attack, not just casual contact. The attack is required. Casual contact would not result in drain.
[devil's advocate]
Well, technically the word "attack" doesn't appear here:Strength Damage (Su)
A shadow's touch deals 1d6 points of Strength damage to a living creature. This is a negative energy effect. A creature dies if this Strength damage equals or exceeds its actual Strength score.
[/advocate]
I agree with your conclusion, but there may be room for argument on the reasoning used above. I'm trying to anticipate arguments I may get from a player who recently became a Shadowdancer, i.e. "So if my shadow and I are flanking an opponent and I successfully bull rush him, he takes STR drain from being pushed into the shadow's space, right?"
A touch attack is an attack, not just casual contact. The attack is required. Casual contact would not result in drain.
[devil's advocate]
Well, technically the word "attack" doesn't appear here:Strength Damage (Su)
A shadow's touch deals 1d6 points of Strength damage to a living creature. This is a negative energy effect. A creature dies if this Strength damage equals or exceeds its actual Strength score.
[/advocate]I agree with your conclusion, but there may be room for argument on the reasoning used above. I'm trying to anticipate arguments I may get from a player who recently became a Shadowdancer, i.e. "So if my shadow and I are flanking an opponent and I successfully bull rush him, he takes STR drain from being pushed into the shadow's space, right?"
If he thinks touching enough is ok ask him does he think it fair to be auto-hit with strength drains. If he is smart he will say no. In order for a monster to attack it requires an attack roll. Other than that how will he know if the monster was quick enough to touch the person before they moved out of the way?
PRD=incorporeal touch +4
You can also ask him what that +4 is there for if no attack is needed.
Good point. I assumed a touch attack for the purpose of touching, but trying to not drain strength.
Damon we need more info on the touch. Is the monster merely passing through the person's body which definitely count's as touching, but would not activate the shadow drain or something different.
Essentially I'm trying to definitively nail down something that should be very straightforward, in order to prevent the exploitation of grammatical loopholes.
I believe the player in question is likely to try having the shadow drain or nor drain STR "when it wants to" and is touching the target in some way: either by having an opponent pushed into the shadow in combat as in the previous post, or as a consequence of the move action when passing through someone on its turn -- and/or claim it can pass through its "master" safely because it doesn't want to hurt him.
He can't have it both ways unless the special ability description indicates that the condition can be activated or suppressed at will as a free action, which it does not. So I doubt he'll try to argue very strongly for both things to be true.
|
A touch attack is an attack, not just casual contact. The attack is required. Casual contact would not result in drain.
[devil's advocate]
Well, technically the word "attack" doesn't appear here:Strength Damage (Su)
A shadow's touch deals 1d6 points of Strength damage to a living creature. This is a negative energy effect. A creature dies if this Strength damage equals or exceeds its actual Strength score.
[/advocate]
Advocacy noted.
The attack is included by context. The passage on Str Damage is an explanation of the effect the melee line item, which is in itself an attack.
Good point. I assumed a touch attack for the purpose of touching, but trying to not drain strength.
Damon we need more info on the touch. Is the monster merely passing through the person's body which definitely count's as touching, but would not activate the shadow drain or something different.Essentially I'm trying to definitively nail down something that should be very straightforward, in order to prevent the exploitation of grammatical loopholes.
I believe the player in question is likely to try having the shadow drain or nor drain STR "when it wants to" and is touching the target in some way: either by having an opponent pushed into the shadow in combat as in the previous post, or as a consequence of the move action when passing through someone on its turn -- and/or claim it can pass through its "master" safely because it doesn't want to hurt him.
He can't have it both ways unless the special ability description indicates that the condition can be activated or suppressed at will as a free action, which it does not. So I doubt he'll try to argue very strongly for both things to be true.
Lichs have paralyzing touches, but they don't get to paralyze you by bumping into you. There are quiet a few monsters with carrier affects where touching them does not activate them. That takes care of the touching(pass through the body) issue. All attacks that have a number such as +4(from the shadow attack) require attack rolls. That is in the rulebook, and shadow drain is an attack. There is no denying any of that. I would actually force him to find a rule saying he can activate the attack, that requires an attack roll, without making an attack roll. Don't go out of your way for him. Make him go find the info.
There are also certain people who will try to bend every rule. Sometimes you just have to say no.
It would fall under the category of intent to do harm, ie an attack to result in strength damage. Otherwise the shadow would use the "swarm" style of assault and simply need to move into the opponents space and deal automatic strength damage.
IMO.
PRD=incorporeal touch +4You can also ask him what that +4 is there for if no attack is needed.
Ah, excellent point! That should indeed be sufficient to define the incorporeal touch as a deliberate attack action. Good, that's settled. Now I just need to work out in rough terms the answers to two more questions about a Shadowdancer's summoned shadow:
(1) What is the nature of its intellible communcation with its host? Is it a private [verbal] language like "twinspeak?" Sign language? Non-ranged telepathy?
(2) To what extent does the creature have its own initiative/free will/creativity? (The context of "initiative" here has nothing to to with its speed of action.) The ordinary undead shadow has INT 6/WIS 12 but "has no goals or outwardly visible motivations other than to sap life and vitality from living beings." That's pretty simple programming, on a par with zombies. The shadowdancer's companion has its master's alignment but no mention is made of enhanced thinking ability. It's certainly able to follow immeidate instructions given by its master. Can it also parse complex standing orders based on changing conditions? Can it anticipate what its master would want in a situation where it's been given no explicit instructions?
Trust me, this will come up in our game. It sort of has already: shadow and master are flanking one opponent, when a second opponent charges through the general area, moving through a square the shadow threatens. The shadow had only been sent to flank the first opponent, but the player argued that it "would have" taken an AOO against the second one because it would "know that I would want it to."
|
|
Oooh! You can also bring up the fact that the entry says nothing about monks who attack shadows with their fists! There is no automatic strength damage for the monk who does this.
The shadow probably "has no goals or motivations other than to" serve the shadowdancer. This makes it very special, and a great companion.
An Int 3 animal companion can understand speech, and is typically controlled as an intelligent cohort. As an Int 6 creature (at least), the 'dancer's shadow is also smart enough to understand speech. It can grasp the rudiments of fighting tactics (wolves are smart enough to flank, trip, and AOO their opponents at Int 2), and can make decisions on the fly. I wouldn't ask for its advice, however, and its knowledge of any subject is quite limited.
I think that the shadow's behavior in that given situation is a-okay.
I infer that the Shadow (creature) summoned is a fragment of the dancers own shadow (thing that results from light hitting him), thus why its alignment matches her own, and why she would suffer a fort save and negative level upon its demise.
It serves as a companion and can communicate intelligibly with the dancer in such a way as it knows what the dancer knows and they "understand" each other. Probably akin to how a familiar can "speak with master" if he wants something that others can hear but not understand. I would personally require it merge with his own shadow and such have a contact based telepathy.
IMO.
Trust me, this will come up in our game. It sort of has already: shadow and master are flanking one opponent, when a second opponent charges through the general area, moving through a square the shadow threatens. The shadow had only been sent to flank the first opponent, but the player argued that it "would have" taken an AOO against the second one because it would "know that I would want it to."
I would allow the AoO. I would do the same with both companions and summoned creatures, as they is a generel tendency for creatures to percieve who is your friends and your foes (even mindless undead affected by Command Undead for example).
In it self that argument might not be a strong one, but I don't think there is any reason to make the players resources less useful, as long as there is no absurd abuse intended.
PRD=incorporeal touch +4You can also ask him what that +4 is there for if no attack is needed.
Ah, excellent point! That should indeed be sufficient to define the incorporeal touch as a deliberate attack action. Good, that's settled. Now I just need to work out in rough terms the answers to two more questions about a Shadowdancer's summoned shadow:
(1) What is the nature of its intellible communcation with its host? Is it a private [verbal] language like "twinspeak?" Sign language? Non-ranged telepathy?
(2) To what extent does the creature have its own initiative/free will/creativity? (The context of "initiative" here has nothing to to with its speed of action.) The ordinary undead shadow has INT 6/WIS 12 but "has no goals or outwardly visible motivations other than to sap life and vitality from living beings." That's pretty simple programming, on a par with zombies. The shadowdancer's companion has its master's alignment but no mention is made of enhanced thinking ability. It's certainly able to follow immeidate instructions given by its master. Can it also parse complex standing orders based on changing conditions? Can it anticipate what its master would want in a situation where it's been given no explicit instructions?
Trust me, this will come up in our game. It sort of has already: shadow and master are flanking one opponent, when a second opponent charges through the general area, moving through a square the shadow threatens. The shadow had only been sent to flank the first opponent, but the player argued that it "would have" taken an AOO against the second one because it would "know that I would want it to."
A shadow is an NPC with an intelligence above 6. It probably does not have any grand designs, but it probably has a personality of sorts and I would not mess with it as long as the player does not treat it badly.
We have rule of say it to play it. If the player does not tell the DM something then it does not happen. I think a shadow would know to flank, but the player might have to give it instruction which should be a free action unless he gets too wordy. AoO's should be taken automatically by the shadow or any other creature. I don't think the shadow is smart enough to not take the AoO, even if it made sense to save one for a bigger threat.
I think a shadow can understand new orders, but it has no ways to know of unspoken intentions that are not common sense. I would basically treat it like an intelligent animal companion that already knows all of the tricks.
I infer that the Shadow (creature) summoned is a fragment of the dancers own shadow (thing that results from light hitting him), thus why its alignment matches her own, and why she would suffer a fort save and negative level upon its demise.
It serves as a companion and can communicate intelligibly with the dancer in such a way as it knows what the dancer knows and they "understand" each other. Probably akin to how a familiar can "speak with master" if he wants something that others can hear but not understand. I would personally require it merge with his own shadow and such have a contact based telepathy.
IMO.
That's a reasonable approach. I'm making a couple of houseruled modifications to the shadow companion already, because the RAW companion would be a little problematic for the party: we have a cleric of Saranrae and a paladin of Saranrae both with pretty much zero tolerance for undead and a ranger with undead as a favored enemy; that ranger also has an in-game romantic relationship with the shadowdancer.
So for my game's purposes, the companion shadow shares many characteritics with undead, but will not be harmed by holy water, and will produce ambiguous results if subjected to Detect Undead.
I've planned for an old Varisian sorceress to explain the nature of the companion to the PC by way of analogy, mixing iron filings with salt and then using a small magnet to pull the iron filings out of the mix --
"Do not confuse light and dark with good and evil. There is light and dark in all living things. You have learned to draw from the Realm of Shadow that which is not yet real but may be, and upon the dark within you to give it a semblance of life. As its life comes from you, it is a part of you and you will feel its loss. It is not undead because death had no part in its creation, and no more inherently evil than the juice of the black lotus, yet it is harmful to touch."
I like it.
Soo... sort of a positive-energy quasi-undead spirit?
No, still based on negative energy. That's already proved inconvenient once when the cleric channeled positive energy to heal her allies, and was only able to exclude their troll opponents via Selective Channeling: the shadow companion took damage from it. :)
No, still based on negative energy. That's already proved inconvenient once when the cleric channeled positive energy to heal her allies, and was only able to exclude their troll opponents via Selective Channeling: the shadow companion took damage from it. :)
The current channel rules do not allow for damaging of undead and healing the living in the same channel--unless there's some new feat I'm unaware of that allows it. This was a change from the PF beta to PF release rules sets. Unless you're playing with a house rule that allows that. If so, just ignore me.
The current channel rules do not allow for damaging of undead and healing the living in the same channel--unless there's some new feat I'm unaware of that allows it. This was a change from the PF beta to PF release rules sets. Unless you're playing with a house rule that allows that. If so, just ignore me.
D'oh! No, no house rule there, so you're quite right, the companion should not have been hurt.