Campfire Bead - instant fire. Can be used to cook, or ignite stuff.
Snapleaf - one-shot immediate action feather fall + invis.
Fugitive's Grenade - Ninja vanish!
Dust of Darkness - Instant Darkness. No caster required.
Traveler's Any-Tool - just darn useful.
|
So here's a thought.. I've spent mine on Shield and/or Shield of Faith... Cause CLW is awesome, but if you are like me and you hoard scrolls cause they are cheaper than wands and potions, a spring loaded wrist sheath of Shield of Faith sometimes can save you having to even pull out a CLW..Actually, technically wands are cheaper than scrolls. One CLW charge from a wand is 15 gp, a scroll of CLW is 25 gp. Plus you have to take more scrolls out between castings. And a lot of GMs don't allow scrolls in SL-wrist sheathes. And pulling/using a wand doesn't provoke (weapon-like object). :)
For the thread tho, if you are getting a composite bow with PP, make it darkwood while at it.
That's what I meant, a Wand of Shield of Faith on a spring loaded wrist sheath... But a Composite Longbow is also a good choice as well..
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
So the spell says this...
The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. ...
But you said this.
...However if you cast a spell that requires a touch (whether to a foe or to an ally) I would say it breaks invisibility since you are touching someone else - not an unattended object
Doesn't that seem a bit contradictory?
;)
|
|
No you are missing what I'm getting at.
Spells that are area effect (bless) are covered by the rules. Spells that are TOUCH is what I'm talking about - even if you are touching an ally it is the TOUCH I would say breaks invisibility - not the spell involved. There are a lot of spells you can cast that don't involve touches but those that do it could be argued do involve interacting with others which is what usually breaks invisibility.
The examples given in the rules don't actually cover spells like cure light wounds (or vanish).
Think of it this way - usually when an ally touches an ally you figure it is automatic because the ally knows to let the other ally touch him. But if one ally is invisible the other has to touch the non-invisible ally (which I would still usually allow without a problem) but I do think touching another person breaks invisibility.
Our argument, essentially, is that curing somebody on your own team is not a "touch attack" simply because it's not an attack. It has nothing to do with the fact that it's a touch.
The spell says the following:
The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions.
When you cast a cure touch spell, you are not attacking a "foe" and therefore does not constitute as an attack under the rules of the invisibility spell. Simply, the spell does not target a foe, it does not fall under attack as per the invisibility spell.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
No you are missing what I'm getting at.
Spells that are area effect (bless) are covered by the rules. Spells that are TOUCH is what I'm talking about - even if you are touching an ally it is the TOUCH I would say breaks invisibility - not the spell involved. There are a lot of spells you can cast that don't involve touches but those that do it could be argued do involve interacting with others which is what usually breaks invisibility.
The examples given in the rules don't actually cover spells like cure light wounds (or vanish).
And that would be fine, except invisibility expressly states what it considers an attack -- "For the purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe." So, for the purposes of invisibility, as long as your spell is not targeting a foe, it is not an attack.
So I would argue that the rules do cover what happens with cure light wounds or vanish. As long as they don't target a foe, they are not an attack.
Think of it this way - usually when an ally touches an ally you figure it is automatic because the ally knows to let the other ally touch him. But if one ally is invisible the other has to touch the non-invisible ally (which I would still usually allow without a problem) but I do think touching another person breaks invisibility.
Alright, I disagree, but let's assume that what you're saying is true. Let me postulate this.
My dragon disciple character has blindsense. Lets say my friendly party wizard goes invisible, then approaches me. I know he is doing this, as I can sense what square he is in. So when he goes to touch me, I would not resist. I know it is him. Would invisibility break in this case? If you say it wouldn't, because I am aware the touch is coming from an ally, then I'd argue the following.
If being unaware of the caster is all that causes your invisibility to break, then why not assume that my experienced wizard friend informs me that he has a tendency at the start of fights to disappear from sight, and then touch people to grant them the same effects. Heck, he could even pat you on the back in a certain pattern or whisper in your ear prior to the cast to let you know it's him.
|
|
But this is a matter of interpretation clearly.
No, it really isn't. The text of the spell, quoted by Walter above, clearly states that an attack is anything that targets a foe, either directly or through area of effect. I really don't see how anyone can think that touching a willing ally would qualify.
I know some will disagree, but I'm 100% Against saving 16 PA for the raise dead.
I think you would be FAR better off with eight purchases from this thread. Instead of planning for your inevitable death, why not plan to stay alive?
From a RP perspective, it's far more believable. From an optimization perspective, it's cheaper. A scroll of invisibility or dimension door is far cheaper.
|
As stated above, a scroll of daylight is useless.
Not necessarily. Some characters can see perfectly fine even in magical darkness. Perhaps such a character is prepared in case, say, her eidolon cannot see under such conditions.
If the rest of the party happens to benefit as well, she won't complain too much.