the explosive rune can be a big capital A. it's hard not to read that.
Then they can read them out of range of the blast.
And a "A" is not "written information".
Huh, ya I mathed wrong on the Int, that should be 24 and the saves should be DC 22. So congratulations, the first edit where you actually read my post! That was of course to good last. As Andreww correctly asserts (because he read my most recent posts evidently), the costs for Symbols/Permanency/Animate Dead are paid through Blood Money (It's not abuse its using the rules, don't complain just because you don't like them). Also the gp cost for my spells that aren't known is literally listed next to them (Blessed Book).
I'm not sure why your implying my that having 9 STR helps your argument, when it is the amount I need to get to 31 STR to cast all those above mentioned Symbols/Permanency/Animate Dead. Actually I could have set it lower, since that will get me to 15k worth of materials at this level and I only need 12,500 to Permanency my most expensive spell, Symbol of Pain. This character is intended to be played in a party where cooperation with the divine caster on off days helps, however that doesn't mean he can't make the symbols he still can but yes he will need to time to recover afterward but that would only be the case if he was solo. Again this is pared down version of a Level 20 intended to demonstrate that a 9th level character is capable of my tactics listed on page 2.
Your really not helping your argument here...
I'm glad you made this post because it shows that you are starting to understand the power of casters! Andreww hit on a number of the important points, so I'll hit the rest. You can play a UMD commoner and you'll even be stronger than other non-casters who don't. However, those scrolls and wands cost money and while you can get a lot of free components out of a want of Blood Money, the Caster literally... HAS NO LIMIT. A year from now he can keep making symbols and Simulacrums daily, each day further compounding his power. The UMD commoner... can't.
AS to your next post, let me direct you to literally my list that is on the first page. Blood Money is a spell, I'm using it as intended. Yes it IS strong. Yes it IS overpowered. That's the point. If I'm arguing my Helicopter can take out a building, I don't ignore the hellfire missiles just cause it make it easy and only use the minigun.
|
Well he does have a 9 strength...He does but what he is doing is cheesing up his strength score with morale, enhancement and inherent bonuses. The Bulls Strength spell adds 4, the Blood Reservoir of Physical prowess adds 8 if you do yourself 4 constitution damage and Blood Rage is a level 3 spell that will add another 10 if you let someone punch you in the face a bit.
31 strength lets you deal 30 strength damage to yourself to produce around 15000gp worth of components. It's cheesy as hell and blatantly abusive and unintended but it is actually legal. I doubt it would fly at most tables mostly down to the whole gentle mans agreement issue.
And the fact that when the temporary boosts go away, you die. And all of this being predicated and the metagaming assumptions of knowing exactly what your numbers are...
The anti-magic hat is the perfect example of player fiat. The assumption is the hat stays on your head perfectly at all times, otherwise the sudden size growth combined with a strap rips your head off. And it is assumed the material is thick enough to block, but not so heavy as to crush you when it grows into a perfect dome that falls safely around you in all directions.
These setups invariably assume perfect conditions for the player, and anything that interferes with these presumed perfect conditions...that is fiat.
Assumptions for the player on the other hand, are not fiat.
Which is why I ask for the build. Everyone can look at it and the explanation, and come to their own conclusions.
When in a build context in another thread the person posted partially filled wands to get around WBL, the judge ruled it kosher after I questioned it and so we were to continue...except the other person quit the contest because so many people felt it was a cheese move.
They won the ruling, but quit the contest.
Cheese is in the eye of the beholder. But it is easier to see it when you actually have it on the table.
If he can find a GM that allows...that. Well, that is that table.
But most reasonable people don't have a GM who would. And so his assumptions of how things work are based on having a GM who allows things that are to me...well...ridiculous.
So when he is making a statement about how things work, we can now see the lens he makes that statement through.
As we saw in the other thread.
Realizing that, quite often, brings a great deal of clarity.
|
|
If you build a party for synergy, you can do it with pretty much any class. People get caught up in doing the same thing, when ideally the party should have variance.Not without an awful lot of difficulty which only increases as levels increase.
A party of Monk, Fighter, Rogue, Barbarian will have a lot more difficulty achieving their goals than Oracle, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
And this is really where the problem arises. When you can replace the pure martial class with one which brings more options to the table and can do their main job as well as they can then your game system is out of whack.
Still think it could be a fun thought experiment. Maybe I'll make the thread when I get home.
I don't particularly disagree with most of this from an offensive perspective, as they are by nature much more flexible than other classes. But they also have issues with fragility, which is why it is a team game.I don't think a group of 4 clerics is fragile. And a group of battle oracle, druid, ckeric and wizard is damn tough.
We are planning to play rise of runelirds with a party of only wizards. I'm not sure if it's doable, but I'm sure I wouldn't even try with full fighters or full rogues
If you build a party for synergy, you can do it with pretty much any class. People get caught up in doing the same thing, when ideally the party should have variance.
I kind of want to set up a thread where people make four of the same class as a party to see what we can come up with.
I think you can do it with anything but maybe cavaliers :)
well, maybe you can if you use UMD extensibely in a group of well optimized chars built to cover each other holes. But it's going to be MUCH harder with some classes. From the top of my head, summoners and druids would be the stronger(4 pets!), then probably clerics and oracles, followed by wizards and sorcerers, the 3/4 casters, the half casters, then barbarians, then fighty guys (including cavaliers and gunslingrrs) and finally monks and rogues. Rogues in particular would be extremelly vulnerable to those monsters which can't be sneakattacked.
Is it possible? I don't know, but I find it quite difficult
|
|
I don't particularly disagree with most of this from an offensive perspective, as they are by nature much more flexible than other classes. But they also have issues with fragility, which is why it is a team game.I don't think a group of 4 clerics is fragile. And a group of battle oracle, druid, ckeric and wizard is damn tough.
We are planning to play rise of runelirds with a party of only wizards. I'm not sure if it's doable, but I'm sure I wouldn't even try with full fighters or full rogues
If you build a party for synergy, you can do it with pretty much any class. People get caught up in doing the same thing, when ideally the party should have variance.
I kind of want to set up a thread where people make four of the same class as a party to see what we can come up with.
I think you can do it with anything but maybe cavaliers :)
well, maybe you can if you use UMD extensibely in a group of well optimized chars built to cover each other holes. But it's going to be MUCH harder with some classes. From the top of my head, summoners and druids would be the stronger(4 pets!), then probably clerics and oracles, followed by wizards and sorcerers, the 3/4 casters, the half casters, then barbarians, then fighty guys (including cavaliers and gunslingrrs) and finally monks and rogues. Rogues in particular would be extremelly vulnerable to those monsters which can't be sneakattacked.
Is it possible? I don't know, but I find it quite difficult
I actually think Rogues and Monks would be easier than Barbarians and Fighters.
But like I said, another thread...
Well he does have a 9 strength...He does but what he is doing is cheesing up his strength score with morale, enhancement and inherent bonuses. The Bulls Strength spell adds 4, the Blood Reservoir of Physical prowess adds 8 if you do yourself 4 constitution damage and Blood Rage is a level 3 spell that will add another 10 if you let someone punch you in the face a bit.
31 strength lets you deal 30 strength damage to yourself to produce around 15000gp worth of components. It's cheesy as hell and blatantly abusive and unintended but it is actually legal. I doubt it would fly at most tables mostly down to the whole gentle mans agreement issue.
And the fact that when the temporary boosts go away, you die. And all of this being predicated and the metagaming assumptions of knowing exactly what your numbers are...
The anti-magic hat is the perfect example of player fiat. The assumption is the hat stays on your head perfectly at all times, otherwise the sudden size growth combined with a strap rips your head off. And it is assumed the material is thick enough to block, but not so heavy as to crush you when it grows into a perfect dome that falls safely around you in all directions.
These setups invariably assume perfect conditions for the player, and anything that interferes with these presumed perfect conditions...that is fiat.
Assumptions for the player on the other hand, are not fiat.
Which is why I ask for the build. Everyone can look at it and the explanation, and come to their own conclusions.
When in a build context in another thread the person posted partially filled wands to get around WBL, the judge ruled it kosher after I questioned it and so we were to continue...except the other person quit the contest because so many people felt it was a cheese move.
They won the ruling, but quit the contest.
Cheese is in the eye of the beholder. But it is easier to see it when you actually have it on the table.
If he can find a...
You know... once again... please read my posts. My initial post detailing the Tinfoil hat track quite explicitly says it is open to interpretation. It is merely included to demonstrate that the build is capable of what I would consider a known tactic. If it is disallowed that has minimal impact on the build, unless your DM likes flying creatures with antimagic field at CR9. Most of its functionality is duplicated by the Shrunken Walls, which basically give you the ability to wall yourself off potentially dangerous threats. This is not as efficient at segregating yourself from the fight, but it has the bonus of being able to help segregate your fellow party members from a threat.
Furthermore, its not metagame knowledge to know how much STR you have, especially with a spell like Blood Money. My character knows that his STR is 15k material components worth. This is testable, so calling it "metagame" knowledge is just plain wrong. Finally, you do not die when you hit 0 STR, please read the rules. You are rendered unconscious and unable to move. (It takes less than 5 minutes to look that up so why post facts that are wrong?)
Calling something "cheese" isn't an argument against how powerful a class is, in fact I would argue that people find a class "cheesy" to be a good indication of the fact that its powerful. After all, if Blood Money wasn't so powerful would you call it cheesy? I think not.
|
|
How does your character know his Str is 15K worth? The "test" is if I do more than that, I die. So...yeah, I guess you can "test" it by dying...
Again, we go back to assumptions you make that are to your benefit, or what I would call "Player Fiat"
Something your build is completely dependent on.
Why is throwing a symbol filled wall at someone not an attack? Fiat. Does that wall explode outward like my hat and kill me? Fiat. Do my allies (or me) never accidentally look at the runes, but my enemies do. Fiat.
Do I know exactly how much my numbers are, in game. Fiat.
At the end of the day, cheese is like pornography. Hard to describe where the line is, but most of us know it when we see it. And while it varies from GM to GM, at the end of the day you are not playing in a game without a GM (and or your fellow players) approving your actions as valid at that table.
You are, at that point, just talking to yourself.
It isn't a gentleman's agreement that you decide not to do these things at a given table. That implies tables would allow you to play with this rubbish, and you are just being kind enough to refrain.
You may be able to find a GM who allows this. It wouldn't be a GM most of us would want to have making decisions. And therefore it wouldn't be our GM, or our table.
So for our purposes, we don't particularly care.
But what we learn from these discussions is that your assumptions are made as to "how things work" based on how things work at your table, with your GM, who we have absolutely no interest in putting in charge.
The single most important decision about any game is who you decide to let GM. As the South Park Skiing Meme goes "If you pick a bad GM...you're gonna have a bad time..."
I would consider any GM who allowed the stuff you described into an actual game to be someone I wouldn't let near a table I planned on investing hours of my life in, let alone let them be the person in charge of those hours of my life.
I value my time. I try to make sure I use it toward things I would actually enjoy.
So when you describe that game, I find it helpful. I can point to it and say "That way leads to that outcome. That is why we don't go that way. It is a very silly place."
You do not, and I cannot stress this enough... do not die at STR 0. If you can't be bothered to do the 5 minutes of looking up the spell at the very least don't post wrong information.
Why isn't dropping a wall that has symbols on it not an attack... well once again, you could go look up the rules for Invisibility and read them, but for the (oh what is now 11th? I think its the 11th, whatever I'm going with 11th) 11th time, I'll make the big scary task of reading the spell easy by bring the text to you and explaining it.
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. Actions directed at unattended objects do not break the spell. Causing harm indirectly is not an attack. Thus, an invisible being can open doors, talk, eat, climb stairs, summon monsters and have them attack, cut the ropes holding a rope bridge while enemies are on the bridge, remotely trigger traps, open a portcullis to release attack dogs, and so forth.
So ya sorry, I don't run my builds on player fiat or DM fiat.
Now I'd would like to believe that is reasonably clear, but just in case I'll explain. I dropping the wall in front of them, is very clearly not an attack. None of the opponents should be in the target area for the wall which *would* break invisibility. You are not the source casting the Symbols on them which *would* break invisibility, you have merely placed a wall that has Symbols on it. Indirect harm as clearly labeled above is not an attack and would *not* break invisibility.
My assumptions are how the rules of the game work. Not how the rules at you or anyone else's table works.. the actual rules. I'm not sure how your argument of "You couldn't play that at my table." advances your argument that casters aren't overpowered. Obviously they are or you would allow this build at your table.
You argument boils down to "Casters aren't overpowered because I put my fingers in my ears and go 'I can't hear you'". I am rather unimpressed with that argument.
I'd like to hit a couple of points that Anzyr missed...
Do my allies (or me) never accidentally look at the runes, but my enemies do. Fiat.
Do I know exactly how much my numbers are, in game. Fiat.
1) You can exempt yourself and allies from triggering the runes when you create them
2) It's not fiat that you know your numbers. In character, you do understand your limits. Your char doesn't say: "I have a strength score of X!" He instead says: "I can lift X pounds". A char does indeed know their attribute scores, just not in the way you're thinking.
I'm not seeing any arguments for PFRPG wizards being overpowered. I'm seeing lots of arguments for blood money being overpowered, but like emergency force sphere, that spell's not even part of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game product line which defines the default rules of the game.
Content from the Pathfinder Adventure Path and Pathfinder Campaign Setting product lines is world-specific. World-specific wizard builds only prove things about wizards in one specific campaign setting; they prove nothing about PFRPG wizards in general.
Thank you very much Dr. Gecko, I completely missed those.
I mention attuning creatures on page 2 quoted here for those who are curious:
Start accumulating these early and put them on your Shrunken Wall from above. Debuffing spell slot free! (Read up on extending casting time to attune creatures.)
I guess it was probably to much to expect Ciretose to read a spell, so I'm glad you explained it for him.
To find out what STR a character has for the purpose of Blood Money all they need to do is see how many 500 gp increments they can create, unless Ciretose also thinks that knowing the gp costs of spell components is metagaming also.
The anti-magic hat is the perfect example of player fiat. The assumption is the hat stays on your head perfectly at all times, otherwise the sudden size growth combined with a strap rips your head off. And it is assumed the material is thick enough to block, but not so heavy as to crush you when it grows into a perfect dome that falls safely around you in all directions.This is entirely agree with and I don't see it automatically working by any means. It assumes the cone drops perfectly around you rather than say rolling away.
It's a pet peeve of mine that GM's think they can tell a player which way his head is leaning at any given moment. Some call it player fiat, I call it playing my char the way I want to.
And if the cone is built properly with the right weight, it will fall correctly without crushing the PC or rolling away, DESPITE which direction his head happens to be leaning at the moment.
|
|
Again, thank you.
If anyone reads that post and says "That makes sense, I want to play in that game." I hope you personal message each other and set up playing engagements as often as possible so none of the rest of us will have to experience that awkwardness of excluding you from our games.
By the way, what is the casting time of the symbol spells? How does that relate to Blood Money, specifically "When you cast another spell in that same round..."
Thank you Dr Grecko for drawing my attention to the casting time.
Please continue, I plan to cite this thread in future arguments and I think it is going wonderfully.
Again, thank you.
If anyone reads that post and says "That makes sense, I want to play in that game." I hope you personal message each other and set up playing engagements as often as possible so none of the rest of us will have to experience that awkwardness of excluding you from our games.
By the way, what is the casting time of the symbol spells? How does that relate to Blood Money, specifically "When you cast another spell in that same round..."
Thank you Dr Grecko for drawing my attention to the casting time.
Please continue, I plan to cite this thread in future arguments and I think it is going wonderfully.
Nice for pointing that out. Even assuming Blood Money works, you are unconcious before the casting time ends because your temperary buffs wear off. That +10 from Blood Rage has a 1 round/lvl casting time, much shorter than the 10 minute symbol casting time, but still long enough to work with the 2 round Permanency casting time. Blood Resivoir lasts 1 round, so there goes +8 that you can no longer use for Permanency.
By the way, what is the casting time of the symbol spells? How does that relate to Blood Money, specifically "When you cast another spell in that same round..."
I believe that is referring to the fact that the blood component needs to be used during the round you create it or it disappears. So I guess the question to ask would be do material components get used up immediately for spells, or at the end of their cast times.
If immediately, then they could indeed use blood money on symbols, if at the end, then you are limited to standard action spells only.
Cain made a great point though about the STR buffs wearing off too soon. There would need to be a counter to that so the wizard doesn't fall unconscious before finishing the spell.
If citing a thread were you had to be corrected about how spells work multiple times and being proven wrong every time helps your argument I'm getting very curious as to what that argument is.
But lets tackle the next error you've made. The casting time of symbols is lengthy, especially if you attune people as I suggested. However, lets break this down for you.
"A material component consists of one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process."
Blood Money is a swift action.
"A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort than a free action. You can perform one swift action per turn without affecting your ability to perform other actions. In that regard, a swift action is like a free action."
Now lets look at casting time for spell longer than 1 round.
When you begin a spell that takes 1 round or longer to cast, you must continue the concentration from the current round to just before your turn in the next round (at least). If you lose concentration before the casting is complete, you lose the spell.
The turn order looks like this:
Turn 1:
Blood Money (swift)
Begin Casting Symbol Spell (Full round action)
Turn 2:
Continue casting Symbol Spell (Full round action)
In turn 1, we have begun the casting process during which material components are annihilated. Blood Money creates us the gem just before we cast Symbol, and by casting Symbol the created component is annihilated as part of the casting process. Unless your going to argue casting the spell isn't "part of the casting process".
Next the issue of falling unconscious... for the 9th (Sure why not its probably higher but I'll roll with it) this is pared down version of a level 20 character intended to demonstrate that a level 9 caster can perform the tactics I described on page 2. The level 20 version simply has a permanently summoned Ghaele, Eladrin prepare Heal 3 times. As the 9th level version was demonstrating tactics that assumed a party, when symbols are being cast I would hope your party divine caster would lend Restoration, not Lesser Restoration which would result in all ability damage being cured. (STR in this case) and thus you won't fall unconscious. Unless giving your divine caster a 2 round heads up in advance before you start casting Blood Money is "metagaming". (Its not.)
That being said, Blood Rage (+10 STR) will last for 10-14 (20-28) rounds (I hope I don't have to explain why at this point), Bull's Strength will last 10-14 (20-28) mins per level. 9+10+4 = 23 STR enough to cast anything that eats up to 11,000 GP. This only excludes Symbol of Pain in which case see above.
If your curious why the Wand of Lesser Restoration is there, its for circumstances where one of your Bloody Skeletons has been destroyed via one of the few methods that circumvent its Deathless Su ability and a new one needs to be made (at least temporarily, out of the enemy/ies corpse/s. Since this is not an off day, it would foolish to assume the party divine caster has prepared either and thus it is wise to prepare.
And they would have gotten away it with it weren't for those pesky PF rules.
Doesn't matter. Blood money specifies that you can only use the components for spells which you cast in the same round which you cast Blood Money. Actual text is:
"When you cast another spell in that same round, your blood transforms into one material component of your choice required by that second spell"
So blood money doesn't actually create components which you then use, it turns your own blood into the components for a spell which you cast on the same round as it.
Just because a spell takes longer than a round to complete casting, does not mean you did not cast the spell the same round as blood money.
It's clear to me that the intent is to create the component and followup by casting another spell. The first sentence says "You cast blood money just before casting another spell."
The sentence you quoted is what happens to your blood when you begin casting another spell. If you do not cast a spell, then they: "transform back into blood at the end of the round if they have not been used as a material component"
It's not restricting the cast time of the followup spell to that round. It's restricting the blood components usage time.
So, my question stands.. When is a material component for multi-round spells used up? Beginning? End? Middle?
That would take both symbols (10 minutes) and permanency (2 rounds) out.It is almost as if the spell was written in such a way as to avoid it being exploited...
you can't bloodmoney your simulacrum either
the explosive rune can be a big capital A. it's hard not to read that.Then they can read them out of range of the blast.
And a "A" is not "written information".
but the kanji "earth" does
kanji-tat2.com/bilder/kanji/earth.gif
Doesn't matter. Blood money specifies that you can only use the components for spells which you cast in the same round which you cast Blood Money. Actual text is:
"When you cast another spell in that same round, your blood transforms into one material component of your choice required by that second spell"
So blood money doesn't actually create components which you then use, it turns your own blood into the components for a spell which you cast on the same round as it.
Just because a spell takes longer than a round to complete casting, does not mean you did not cast the spell the same round as blood money.
It's clear to me that the intent is to create the component and followup by casting another spell. The first sentence says "You cast blood money just before casting another spell."
The sentence you quoted is what happens to your blood when you begin casting another spell. If you do not cast a spell, then they: "transform back into blood at the end of the round if they have not been used as a material component"
It's not restricting the cast time of the followup spell to that round. It's restricting the blood components usage time.
So, my question stands.. When is a material component for multi-round spells used up? Beginning? End? Middle?
It is left entirely undefined as far as I can tell, and thus the entire usability of the spell in this contect is left to GM interpretation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, my question stands.. When is a material component for multi-round spells used up? Beginning? End? Middle?
simulacrum has 12 hours casting time. I doubt you use the 100 pounds of snow needed to make the statue in 6 seconds, then spend the other 11 hours and 59 minutes idle.
I'd rule it's not possible. Which makes me happy because it's one gentlemen's agreement less to deal
Its pretty well defined. You are clearly *casting* the Symbol/Permanency/Simulacrum the same round, even though it will not be finished until later.
As I quoted above material components are consumed as part of the casting process. As casting a spell is part of the part of the casting process, they are annihilated when casting begins.
Edit: To address your post Gustavo Iglesias: The costly material component we are using in Simulacrum is the powdered ruby worth 500 gp per HD of the simulacrum, not the ice sculpture.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its pretty well defined. You are clearly *casting* the Symbol/Permanency/Simulacrum the same round, even though it will not be finished until later.
As I quoted above material components are consumed as part of the casting process. As casting a spell is part of the part of the casting process, they are annihilated when casting begins.
it's not well defined at all. The casting time and the description of simulacrum suggest that you spend hours working with the components, not that you instantly do the 50.000 pound snow figure of a volossal great wyrm, then do nothing for hours until the spell finishes. Sorry, but that exploit doesn't work
Edit to address your edit: sorry, but no. The material components are "ce sculpture of the target plus powdered rubies worth 500 gp per HD of the simulacrum"
|
|
So, my question stands.. When is a material component for multi-round spells used up? Beginning? End? Middle?
simulacrum has 12 hours casting time. I doubt you use the 100 pounds of snow needed to make the statue in 6 seconds, then spend the other 11 hours and 59 minutes idle.
I'd rule it's not possible. Which makes me happy because it's one gentlemen's agreement less to deal
But...But...then the exploit no rational GM would allow would not be allowed to work!
Nooooooooooooooo!
:)
Yes, that would indeed be the case, losing the component from failed casting would be the case as they are annihilated as part of the process of casting, which has now failed. "You can't re-burn coal to make steam if the engine goes out.", as my hypothetical grandpappy used to say.
Edit: To Gustavo again.
Lets look at the components shall we?
Components V, S, M (ice sculpture of the target plus powdered rubies worth 500 gp per HD of the simulacrum)
The ice sculpture is not what Blood Money is being used to replace, it actually has no cost. Arguably Eschew Material could waive the Ice Sculpture (it has no listed value), but since then you wouldn't get a check to make the likeness I recommend just making the Ice Sculpture as the spell requires since the Rubies are the costly part anyway.
Found an un-official ruling on the matter from Mr Jacobs.
When you cast blood money, you do so with a swift action. You create the needed components, and must then IMMEDIATELY (in the same round) cast the spell you want to use those components with. You don't need to finish casting the spell in the same round, though; once you start casting the spell, the components (and the prepared spell itself) are committed and used.
Seems to support the use of blood money on symbols.
Also Anzyr you could add this to help mitigate he STR damage from the spell
Wow... that is... amazingly and exactly on point. Well I guess we mark this down as another swing and a miss for Ciretose. I hereby nominate you for all of the Cookies.
I find it deeply amusing how many attempts detractors of how powerful casters have made to poke holes in this only to come up short, I think my heart grew 5 sizes this day.
Edit: Dr. Grecko - Yup! That's a solid item that is part of how I get 51 STR for free Wishes. It's just all around fantastic even outside of Blood Money. It has no limit as to how much ability damage/drain it can prevent and eif you are hit with multiple it applies in full to each at 66k or 33k for crafters it is a crazy good bargain.
So...
So... it looks like he changed his mind to allow longer spell casting times. The one I quoted was more recent ruling. Something or someone must have convinced him his previous position was erroneous.
|
|
Also Anzyr you could add this to help mitigate he STR damage from the spell
"...and those who are immune to Strength damage (such as undead spellcasters) cannot use blood money to create valuable material components."
I guess we can move the argument here if you like, the last one didn't go well.
You could FAQ it?
That awkward moment when you realize your citation < my citation...
Worse...when you realize you were loud wrong...
Might want to hit your edit button before someone sees the irony in this ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your quote is completely at odds with the linked quote in the actual thread.
When you cast blood money, you do so with a swift action. You create the needed components, and must then IMMEDIATELY (in the same round) cast the spell you want to use those components with. You don't need to finish casting the spell in the same round, though; once you start casting the spell, the components (and the prepared spell itself) are committed and used.
Also, that awkward moment Ciretose when you realize you forgot check your post dates. (Maybe you just have a reverse time plane trick if so let me know.)
Preserving for great justice:
That awkward moment when you realize your citation < my citation...
Worse...when you realize you were loud wrong...
I guess we can move the argument here if you like, the last one didn't go well.
You'll have to let me know what its like to be wrong so many times in one thread.
Also Anzyr you could add this to help mitigate he STR damage from the spell"...and those who are immune to Strength damage (such as undead spellcasters) cannot use blood money to create valuable material components."
I guess we can move the argument here if you like, the last one didn't go well.
You could FAQ it?
Nothing about that ring makes you immune to str damage.. it lessens the amount you take by up to 6 points max.
^That doesn't make them IMMUNE to Str damage, it just mitigates the damage by up to 6.
And I guess I should get to work on that Wizard. I'll try and stay away from blatant cheese though.
20 PB, 2 traits, average WBL?
Edit: I feel the need to share that between the Druid and the Wizard we just finished the first part of book 4 of RotRL in less than 2 hours because we scryed, teleported, and invisibled our way into the "army" in the middle of the night and wrecked them (except the dragon, we'll have to deal with him later since he flew off).
Pretty good for, as someone else put it "5 guys, a tiger, and a squirrel".
Well the one good thing I've gotten from this thread is to ban blood money in my games.
That has been my take-away as well. Nothing I have seen from any of the other strategies/comments has been broken or overpowered relative to other classes. Just because 1 splat publishes a single ability that is obviously not in line powerwise with other abilities does not mean that the classes that can use it are overpowered.
|
|
@Dr Grecko -Uh huh...recent...
He literally said it can't be used for spells that take more than a round to cast.
Literally said that.
Let it go. Or better yet ask him specifically if what Anzyr described is allowed by the spell.
I would love to see his response.