|
Honestly, this is a problem with your perception of the hp abstraction. In D&D, 1hp is completely functional. No concentration checks, no attack penalties, no damage penalties, no movement penalties, no penalties to skill checks, etc. Are you saying that you can remain at full capacity while beaten to a pulp except when trying to study your book?Hp damage doesn't translate like that.
That is an interesting thing. You're so badly thrashed that someone can breath on you and you'll fall over ('bout what happens if some enemy just taps you when you're down to 1 h.p.), yet there is no effect, ever, in D&D strictly from h.p. damage until you drop (other than momentary loss of concentration when you're actually being hit and/or drained of points). There used to be the thought that at some point of severe, all the abstractions that hit points represent change over to being actual wounds, if your hit points were dropped low enough (not even gonna reopen the can of worms over what do "cure" and "heal" spells really do, since hit points don't represent actual wounds).
I suppose, considering that D&D makes no impacts on anyone for being beaten all the way down to the edge of death, it'd be unfair to penalize spell-casters alone for being low on h.p.
Honestly, this is a problem with your perception of the hp abstraction. In D&D, 1hp is completely functional. No concentration checks, no attack penalties, no damage penalties, no movement penalties, no penalties to skill checks, etc. Are you saying that you can remain at full capacity while beaten to a pulp except when trying to study your book?Hp damage doesn't translate like that.
I would say that your concept of abstraction is patently ridiculous as there are in game modifiers that describe such events when they occur only they are not necessarily triggered upon hp loss. Since the player knows when they are low on hp then the hp is not that far of an abstraction as if they were truly fully functional then they would not be near death. If hp was not in relation to fully functional health then it wouldn't matter if the wizard was injured when he was memorizing because he would be fully functional.
At no point did I say ruling otherwise was wrong that is just how I read the funny words on the paper and interpret them.
@wraithstrike. You have made it very clear that you are a super human being of concentration according to your perspective and without the drive or will to prove otherwise you'll just have to accept that most mortals, even the cool ones in game, find it hard to concentrate when we do fantastically complicated and difficult tasks when our arms and legs are broken.
Edit: Flint in what way is it unfair to melee types to rule that a caster cannot memorize when on the verge of death due to distraction?
By that logical extension is it unfair for casters to have to make concentration rolls when they get hit? Moreover do you normally have casters trying to memorize when they're on the verge of death? I'm still trying to figure out when I'd have to make this ruling. I'm reasonably sure I wouldn't, but if I did I would rule it a failure because being on the verge of death is distracting. Being distracted should impart no penalties other than its hard to memorize multiple pages perfectly of magical text filled books.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm saying that HP and damage are on a strange level of abstraction that to say that being low on hp equates to being badly thrashed is not RAW and it doesn't make sense until after the next hit that does damage. I mean the character can run at full capacity all day as long as they manage to avoid any hits. At any point does distraction ever come up? Is distraction associated with having hp damage? It's one of those weird gamey things.
Trying to use it to justify why a wizard is distracted whenever studying a book while nobody else is ever distracted ever is just making something up to nerf wizards with using a concept that the very nature stretches verisimilitude to the limits anyway.
Sure it is and it makes perfect sense according to RAW and RAI to me. Perhaps you read it another way. That's fine, but I disagree. Luckily for me most people I've met believe that if a t.rex swallows you whole and bites you several times you might not be dead, but you are certainly hurt, quite possibly very very badly. Luckily for you I'm not your dm.
I'm not justifying a way to nerf wizards. I'm not justifying anything. I'm saying that being almost dead is distracting from my perspective. No justification required. Its a simple statement of fact based upon my perspective.
You're putting words in my mouth. At no point did I say that no else is ever distracted. I'm saying that it doesn't matter enough to affect the outcome of the action, according to raw, unless it involves memorizing perfectly long pages of text. Don't feel too bad if I thought that it would be a constant problem, all those mangled wizards trying to memorize spells instead of getting medical help, then I'd also house rule it to any other extreme concentration based task, but luckily I don't have to do so as its never come up and the rules say I can if it does. Not that I have to but that I can, because it allows to dm to define what qualifies as distracting.
Edit: How on earth do you consider, assuming you believe hp to be entirely an abstraction, this to be a nerf to wizards? On the off hand chance you have a wizard who believes that medical attention is for wimps he still generally has to rest before memorizing spells which then recovers hp.
|
|
@concerro
First off no a lot of the others WERE saying you need 2 hours sleep and 6 hours rest before you could memorize spells while wearing the ring.I've also been saying that the recent casting limit runs into difficulty with the 2 for 8 value as if I were to sleep 8 hours the recent limit would be overcome and since the ring lets you get the benefit of 8 hours rest in 2 that recent casting limit should also be reduced to 2 hours from eight.
This is where we disagree if you are saying this is a rule. The ring never mentions being able to do that.
Are you sure the ring specifically says it makes 2 hours of rest not sleep rest the equivilent of 8 for casters who need rest to prepare spells. Seems fairly straightforward to me even without the whole I memorize 2 spells now and the majority in six hours issue .
Engaging in conversation is specified in the rules as a distraction that prevents the wizard from rememorizing spells. So would posting here, watching yahoo movies and going on yahoo chat.
Do you have a rules quote for that?
Yes and I posted it earlier, the core book specifically states engaging in conversation prevents spell memorization. I'm posting via mobile so I don't have the options available to repost it now.
As for hitpoints I see at least one person understands what I was getting it, its easy to say someone who's on 4 out of 50 hitpoints and never did anything about the thrown dagger that did critical damage should be hurt, distracted and unable to memorize spells.
Oh and the kneecapping example isn't fair remember your memorizing not writing and there's no baseline to compare. What you need to do is give him an hour to study a 2000 page paper, test him on it, kneecap him, the give him a 2000 page paper on a different subject to study for an hour, test him again and see which one got the better score.
Liam: Please repeat after me, "Wizards and other prepared casters cannot re-memorize spells they have already cast more than once per day".
Wizards can memorize spells just fine with 1 hit point.
Is that a counter argument or just personal opinion?
Edit for all those who make bold declarative statements with nothing else written to support them: Your point?
Wizards can memorize spells just fine with 1 hit point.
Agreed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards can memorize spells just fine with 1 hit point.Is that a counter argument or just personal opinion?
It's RAW. There are no associated penalties for having 1hp. In fact at level one in 3.5 it was possible to have a wizard that started with 1hp a hair's breadth from death at all times and yet still fully functional.
You can argue it all day everyday but it will not make it less true. Until you pull out the line that explains that any kind of hp damage imposes a penalty you have no argument.
|
|
Wizards can memorize spells just fine with 1 hit point.Is that a counter argument or just personal opinion?
Edit for all those who make bold declarative statements with nothing else written to support them: Your point?
It's called a fact I'm afraid. Please find me a rule written anywhere that states how many HP a wizard must have in order to memorize their spells. Actually don't bother because you won't find one. The only time you have to worry is if you are taking continuous damage from something or you take damage while memorizing.
|
|
@Shallowsoul
Repeat after me. A wizard can't memorize a SPELL SLOT more than once a day but the can memorize 2 spells now, 2 spells in an hour, another 3 spells 4 hours after that and then a final spell half an hour after that so long as they had the spell slots free and unused. Given this and given the fact a ring of sustanence specifically states it makes 8 hors of rest count as 2 it IS reasonable to rule spells cast in the prior day AND more than 2 hours previously DO NOT count towards your spell usage for the current day.
Liam: I don't mean to be rude but are you new to RPG's? You really need to listen when people tell you how a rule goes. The only thing a Ring of Sustenance does for a spellcaster such as a wizard is narrow the gap that a monster can disturb your sleep. A Ring of Sustenance has no bearing "what so ever" with regards to memorizing spells. Nobody said anything about unused spell slots so just ignore that.
Rin g of Sustenance
Aura faint conjuration; CL 5th
Slot ring; Price 2,500 gp; Weight —
Description
This ring continually provides its wearer with life-sustaining
nourishment. The ring also refreshes the body and mind, so that
its wearer needs only sleep 2 hours per day to gain the benefit
of 8 hours of sleep. This allows a spellcaster that requires rest to
prepare spells to do so after only 2 hours, "but this does not allow a spellcaster to prepare spells more than once per day". The ring must be worn for a full week before it begins to work. If it is removed, the owner must wear it for another week to reattune it to himself.
This is directly from the book. All you need to pay attention to is the part that I have bolded for you.
Reason #32456 why I prefer psionics to core casting. Psionics are simple and easy. You can meditate for 1 hour to recover spent power points. You can't recover any points that you've spent within the last 8 hours. So if you spent 12 points within the last 8 hours, no amount of resting or meditating is going to get you those points back. However, points you spent 8< hours ago can be recovered with an hour of refocusing.
@Liam and when the wizard rests he gets back hp. Since I said that being below 10% hp is a distraction according to me, and distractions prevent memorization.
@Shallowsoul and Tark
Sure no problem. Here you go.
"To prepare any spell, a wizard must have enough peace, quiet, and comfort to allow for proper concentration. The wizard's surroundings need not be luxurious, but they must be free from distractions. Exposure to inclement weather prevents the necessary concentration, as does any injury or failed saving throw the character might experience while studying. Wizards also must have access to their spellbooks to study from and sufficient light to read them."
Concentration is generally defined as under the concentration effect which states that you can't memorize spells under the many following conditions which include injury, being affected negatively by a spell, grappled, under vigorous motion, violent motion, and entangled.
Distraction though is not defined. I define being below 10% health as distracting. I also define starvation, fatigue, sickness, and loud halflings as distracting. Therefore it is allowed by raw without altering raw the slightest iota.
At no point did I ever state that raw said you had to use the 10% hp. Since raw does not define distraction it is up to the dm to define it. Which I have and I am supported by raw and if someone else ruled that it was not a distraction then they would be supported by raw as well.
|
|
@Liam and when the wizard rests he gets back hp. Since I said that being below 10% hp is a distraction according to me, and distractions prevent memorization.
@Shallowsoul and Tark
Sure no problem. Here you go."To prepare any spell, a wizard must have enough peace, quiet, and comfort to allow for proper concentration. The wizard's surroundings need not be luxurious, but they must be free from distractions. Exposure to inclement weather prevents the necessary concentration, as does any injury or failed saving throw the character might experience while studying. Wizards also must have access to their spellbooks to study from and sufficient light to read them."
Concentration is generally defined as under the concentration effect which states that you can't memorize spells under the many following conditions which include injury, being affected negatively by a spell, grappled, under vigorous motion, violent motion, and entangled.
Distraction though is not defined. I define being below 10% health as distracting. I also define starvation, fatigue, sickness, and loud halflings as distracting. Therefore it is allowed by raw without altering raw the slightest iota.
At no point did I ever state that raw said you had to use the 10% hp. Since raw does not define distraction it is up to the dm to define it. Which I have and I am supported by raw and if someone else ruled that it was not a distraction then they would be supported by raw as well.
You still haven't posted anything to help your argument. Having 1 hitpoint incurs no penalty what so ever. Nor is it considered taking damage or anything like that. You find me anywhere that states having 1 hp left will keep you from this and you win the whole argument.
Distraction though is not defined. I define being below 10% health as distracting. Therefore it is allowed by raw without altering raw the slightest iota.
Sure, and since muscle stamina and lactic acid metabolization aren't strictly defined, I define them by saying you can only swing a sword a number of times per day equal to your Strength score. That is equally allowed by RAW without altering RAW the slightest iota, using exactly your logic.
@Liam. He's going to sit there in a quiet place instead of sleep? Why? Have someone else stand guard the wizard needs a nap.
Edit again: Liam I may have misunderstood your previous post. Please disregard the above if I have.
@Kirth Since I can't seem to find anything in the rule book stating that in order to swing a sword you need muscle stamina raw doesn't really support you. Can you show it to me?
I can find a passage stating that you must be distraction free though for memorizing spells. Edit: My logic uses passages from the book that aren't just fluff.
@Shallowsoul. Debating with you is meaningless. Your counter argument doesn't address my post and is just another bold declarative statement without any support.
|
|
@Shallowsoul
No I'm not new to RPGs and what you need to pay attention to is the sentence before the one you bolded.This allows a spellcaster that requires "rest to prepare spells" to do so after 2 hours.
Please note the part in quotes as I can't bold on my phone. It says rest, not sleep, rest and is specifically saying if you need rest to prepare spells e.g. a wizard you can do so after 2 hours not 8 but 2 it couldn't be any more plain. There is in fact one sentence saying you only need 2 hours of sleep not 8 and then a SECOND sentence saying the same 2 for 8 rule applies to resting for the purposes of regaining spells.
The 24 hour day is a seperate restriction I am not only NOT arguing against but have used to support my interpretation of the two hour rule. Yet people keep harping on at me about the 24 hour rule for some reason.
As for unused spell slots yes someone said something about that. Me when pointing out how the 2 hour rest limit should apply to the section on the spells cast in the preceeding 8 hours counting against your limit for the next day.
24 hours has nothing to do with resting. 24 hour "Per Day" means you cannot re-memorize spells for a second time within that time frame.
I've already explained to you what a Ring of Sustenance does for a spellcaster. It gives him/her 6 hours extra to do something else besides memorize spells again. You can't rest for 2 memorize, cast a few spells, rest for 2 hours and try to memorize spells again to go in those slots.
|
|
@Liam. He's going to sit there in a quiet place instead of sleep? Why? Have someone else stand guard the wizard needs a nap.
@Kirth Since I can't seem to find anything in the rule book stating that in order to swing a sword you need muscle stamina raw doesn't really support you. Can you show it to me?
I can find a passage stating that you must be distraction free though for memorizing spells. Edit: My logic uses passages from the book that aren't just fluff.
@Shallowsoul. Debating with you is meaningless. Your counter argument doesn't address my post and is just another bold declarative statement without any support.
I have full support of the RAW while you have full support of your own opinion.
@Kirth Since I can't seem to find anything in the rule book stating that in order to swing a sword you need muscle stamina raw doesn't really support you. Can you show it to me?
Strength measures muscle and physical power. This ability is important for those who engage in hand-to-hand (or “melee”) combat, such as fighters, monks, paladins, and some rangers. Strength also sets the maximum amount of weight your character can carry. A character with a Strength score of 0 is too weak to move in any way."
This section doesn't spell out why it's "important," any more than the section you quote spells out what constitutes "distracted," so I'm making a hypothetical DM call, in exactly the way you are doing.
Kirth that is one hell of a stretch of logic. Stating that a healthy individual can only swing a sword a number of times per day equal to his str score.
Edit: I just swung my sword sixty times. I've got a str score of sixty in your hypothetical games. I'll reference that the next time one of those stat yourself threads come about. I'm kidding here, but I'd like to think that you see my point.
Sadly though it still isn't what I'm doing. I'm not inventing mechanics. I'm delineating terms. I find almost dead to be a distraction. Doesn't matter if you're a wizard, a frog, a god almost dead is distracting. Memorization mechanics dictate that if you are distracted in any fashion you cannot memorize spells. The mechanics are already present without my actions in the slightest.
Edit: If I don't define distraction then the clause is meaningless. You may define it differently. That's great I'm all for that. But I'm not wrong by raw.
You're making one up that is not present in the rules.
Edit: You're inventing a mechanic to go with that definition of important.
For some odd reason when I read your above comment I thought I might have seen something stating that the wizard wasn't above 10% because resting does not necessarily mean sleeping. I got a phone call at the same time and didn't go back to reread it after hence the nonsensical reply. Sorry about that.
My alchemist does the same. Its the best way to be productive in an eleven person group that also has a rather large supply of animal companions.
Its something I've noticed about the board. It isn't really a problem, but it makes it rather hard to have a logical argumentative discussion.
|
|
This is directly from the book. All you need to pay attention to is the part that I have bolded for you.
Shallowsoul--
You really should pay more attention to the fine points that Liam is using... yes, you get to do your primary preparation of spells once per day-- but the book, as RAW, explicitly states that you can leave some slots open, and do another bit of preparation later in the day to fill them (or bits of preparation, if you left multiple slots open, and want to fill them 1 at a time). So, in that sense-- yes, you can prepare spells more than once a day-- you just can't prepare spells more than once a day in each spell-slot you have.Liam's present argument (Liam, please correct me if I'm getting this wrong)-- is, he's used a couple of spells within 8 hours of his time for 'primary preparation'(but after he's rested)-- so, when he prepares spells for the day, he can't use those slots. Later on in the day, he grabs a nap (2 hours counts as a full rest with his ring), and prepares spells in the couple of slots that were unavailable to him when he did 'primary preparation' because of the 'within 8 hours' rule, but which he hasn't used at all since the last time he did his full, main spell-preparation set for the day (i.e., in slots that he couldn't prepare with the rest of his spells in the morning, but which he has not used, by memorization or casting, within the current 24-hour count/magic day following his main preparation time).
Now, that may or may not be RAW, but that's the argument Liam is making-- you might want to discuss his point, instead of propping up a straw-man to slice down.
|
|
Edit: Flint in what way is it unfair to melee types to rule that a caster cannot memorize when on the verge of death due to distraction?
By that logical extension is it unfair for casters to have to make concentration rolls when they get hit? Moreover do you normally have casters trying to memorize when they're on the verge of death? I'm still trying to figure out when I'd have to make this ruling. I'm reasonably sure I wouldn't, but if I did I would rule it a failure because being on the verge of death is distracting. Being distracted should impart no penalties other than its hard to memorize multiple pages perfectly of magical text filled books.
Jak-- if by 'Flint' you meant me, you might want to get my name right-- I almost missed this (Finn works-- don't need the whole thing spelled out). :P
Actually, I probably overstated the case in saying that it's unfair to casters to rule that they can't memorize when they're on the edge of death, while melee types face no penalties at all (other than the obvious "just one more hit and you're down..." that they share with any other PC, caster included, who's been dropped to really low hp's)-- but that was the argument I was commenting on, not that it was unfair to melee types that casters shouldn't be able to concentrate at really low hp's. It's along the lines of "do you apply a penalty to the fighter when he's using the craft skill to fix up damage to his armor while he's low on hp's?" If yes, okay, that's an extension of the same principle being used to decide the wizard can't concentrate while grievously wounded-- if no, why is the wizard having trouble concentrating, but the fighter isn't? I think being wounded to the point where you're on the very edge of death should be distracting and make all kinds of otherwise routine activities more difficult-- which only happens when someone drops you exactly to 0 hp, rather than having more of a continuum of effects depending on how badly wounded you are.
Normally, I don't see any of our casters trying to prepare spells while grievously wounded in any games I'm usually in... we try to get everyone healed up as much as possible after we've taken lots of damage, before we move on to any other activities (such as letting the prepared casters do what they gotta do to load their spells for the day-- personally, when I'm playing a caster-- which I'm doing right now in both PF campaigns I'm playing in-- I play spontaneous casters so the specific example of spell preparation isn't a problem that would affect me, but it would affect some of the other PCs in the group).
Now, much more to the point-- I made the comment I did about the lack of penalties (as a matter of RAW) in D&D and PF when you're at really low hit points, as a comparison to other RPGs I play, where when your character takes damage, it's presumed to be actual injuries not the whole mess of abstracts that hit points can cover without representing real wounds-- and where, when you're wounded (especially when you're wounded severely), you suffer penalties to pretty much everything you try to do ('cause it's really hard to be as effective as you were unhurt, when you've got a gaping hole in your guts and you're trying not to bleed out...). These games do vary as far as where the penalties start (most presume that when you've just taken some bruising and are a little battered, you're not really facing penalties-- yet), and how severe they get before you just drop from shock and become non-functional (possibly dying or dead, maybe just out of it-- depending on the source/type of damage and the game system in question). Of course, in most of these games-- you don't have a whole lot of hit points, and getting hit in combat can be really really deadly, no matter how experienced you are... the real art to keeping your PC alive and healthy is developing your defensive and tactical skills so that you don't get hit in the first place.
It's a very different approach than D&D/PF, where soaking up massive amounts of "damage" is a routine part of the action at higher levels. Penalties for being severely injured are something I think is a good thing, but I have no idea how'd you go about fairly inserting such a system into a class/level/hit dice system.
First of all sorry about the name. I'm a little out of it today.
Raw would support me restricting the wizard. It should be there for any intense concentration skill in my opinion and I would houserule it so.
I see hp as a reasonable abstraction as opposed to a complete abstraction. In my view if it is a complete abstraction then one has to wonder exactly what AC does as well as wonder about the whole host of other issues.
Perhaps my interpretation of distraction is influenced by the many years I played shadowrun. But to be honest even disregarding the games I am familiar with that have the penalty system to apply. I'd still rule it that way I think. Simply because if the standard response to near death is dear god get me to a hospital, an extrapolation of "cleric help please", I find it somewhat unreasonable to not equate that to at least a noisy halfling.
Kirth that is one hell of a stretch of logic. I'm not inventing mechanics.
"Casters cannot prepare spells if under 10% of maximum hp" is inventing mechanics, and it is also one hell of a stretch of logic. Look, Jak, I know people who tell me that Dubya was a shapeshifting reptilian from Draco who is suppressing magic alien technology, and who engineered 9/11 in order to further the Rockefellers' scheme of world domination (see the movie "Thrive" if you think no one really thinks this). They are totally serious about this, claim they are not making anything up, and take other explanations for their "facts" as wild stretches of logic, when the simple truth of their story is so obviously evident. Why can't I just see it? Maybe because their story is crap, even though it makes sense to them. That's sort of how I feel with this discussion.
TL/DR: You invented that 10% mechanic. It's not in the RAW.
"To prepare any spell, a wizard must have enough peace, quiet, and comfort to allow for proper concentration. The wizard's surroundings need not be luxurious, but they must be free from distractions. Exposure to inclement weather prevents the necessary concentration, as does any injury or failed saving throw the character might experience while studying. Wizards also must have access to their spellbooks to study from and sufficient light to read them."Concentration is generally defined as under the concentration effect which states that you can't memorize spells under the many following conditions which include injury, being affected negatively by a spell, grappled, under vigorous motion, violent motion, and entangled.
Distraction though is not defined. I define being below 10% health as distracting. I also define starvation, fatigue, sickness, and loud halflings as distracting. Therefore it is allowed by raw without altering raw the slightest iota.
At no point did I ever state that raw said you had to use the 10% hp. Since raw does not define distraction it is up to the dm to define it. Which I have and I am supported by raw and if someone else ruled that it was not a distraction then they would be supported by raw as well.
Um, it clearly states what it entails right there.
Basically all you're doing is essentially adding on to the rules through some arbitrary measurement of what you think is right (i.e. houseruling) and really you're doing a poor job of it.
Okay so the caster can't concentrate on memorizing spells because his bones ache from taking a hard hit to the jaw from an ogre. So how come he can still concentrate on spells? Or in fact cast at all with loud halflings about? These are after all "distractions" to as you define them.
So let's take this further. Let's say that you agree this is a houserule and we can leave it at that. Generally it's just a mean spirited house rule. Why? Let's say I took this here spiked bat right? And then I gave you a spiked bat of your own. Allow me to smack you as hard as I can in the collar bone with that spiked bat. Now, while wearing armor and dodging I want you to try and hit me in the kidneys. See where I'm going with this? If injuries worked under your logic in pathfinder you'd have to penalize: bardic performance, energy channeling, attack rolls, damage rolls, movement, and about a dozen other things I could list if you liked. The gist of it is you are interpretating the rules by pulling arbitrary crap out of your bum and declaring it RAW. No, it is not RAW, the raw states what counts. It does not mention hit point totals, and even under Injury and Death it even describes that there are only two times that your hit points have any penalty on the character; when he is at 0, and when he is at -1 and on. That is it, that is all. You are defining a hit point loss as a distraction purely in the pursuit in some arbitrary form of balance without actually balancing anything, without using RAW, and by coming up with your own definition on an abstract concept that never before penalized anything at any point while simultaneously giving players something to grumble about.
After all if 10% is the "magic number" to avoid distraction then I can imagine wizard players getting really arsed about it and taking time out of the precious little gaming time people have to absolutely ensure they get the space they need in a process that should take only a few seconds.
This kind of ruling is anal retentive and simply pointless. It make gaming time an unnecessary chore of "find the quiet corner and pop some tylenol" rather than "memorize the spells so we can get on with eh heroic ass kicking".
Anyway, I'm done ranting. Happy gaming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to derail your derailment too much, but didn't this thread have something to do with non-casters at some point?
I lost track...is this thread about how casters are more powerful than martials or is it about how much sleep you need to prepare spells?
EDIT: I can't believe I got ninja'd with that question.
Wizards can memorize spells just fine with 1 hit point.Agreed.
Never been a shadow of a doubt about it in 30+ years of playing.
I think the word used was cinematic
I lost track...is this thread about how casters are more powerful than martials or is it about how much sleep you need to prepare spells?
EDIT: I can't believe I got ninja'd with that question.
You mean this thread had anything to do with anything?
... Now here’s where interpretation finally enters into it I’m saying that since for the purposes of sleep and resting to be able to memorize spells the ring converts 8 hours into 2 as per (H) it should also reduce the number of hours required before a spell slot opens up to memorize again from 8 to 2 ...
Liam, I, at least, understand what you are saying here. But it's not RAW. The ring description does not say it removes or alters the restriction in preparing a slot which has cast a spell within the past 8 hours.
Your assertion that the restricted time is reduced to 2 hours because the ring reduces wizard rest time from 8 hours to 2 hours is purely your own interpretation. And it's not an interpretation anyone else is required to share, nor are they required to agree that your interpretation is the most logical, most balanced or most flavorful.
Basically it's your own house rule, no more, no less.
|
|
Raw would support me restricting the wizard. It should be there for any intense concentration skill in my opinion and I would houserule it so.I see hp as a reasonable abstraction as opposed to a complete abstraction. In my view if it is a complete abstraction then one has to wonder exactly what AC does as well as wonder about the whole host of other issues.
Perhaps my interpretation of distraction is influenced by the many years I played shadowrun. But to be honest even disregarding the games I am familiar with that have the penalty system to apply. I'd still rule it that way I think. Simply because if the standard response to near death is dear god get me to a hospital, an extrapolation of "cleric help please", I find it somewhat unreasonable to not equate that to at least a noisy halfling.
Jak-
While I find your position reasonable on having that distract the wizard-- I would think that anyone else who was trying to do something that reasonably requires good concentration, would also be affected if they were down to 1 HP-- maybe still be able to work at it, but taking some kind of penalty for also being distracted.Hmmm... I am down to seeing HP as almost a complete abstraction, and the same for armor-- the way D&D/PF handles armor class (and its relation to the armor you wear) is very abstract to me also. And I try not to think too hard about the other issues-- it's not a realistic game, and never will be... and if I delve too much into the details it's just going to keep frustrating the hell out of me.
"Cleric!" Yes, that's the standard response to being low on HP, ain't it? :)
Liam--
Interesting. Okay, I think I get it. I would have to consider your argument in a lot more detail before I could recommend its use or give a good argument against it for the game.
You mean this thread had anything to do with anything?I lost track...is this thread about how casters are more powerful than martials or is it about how much sleep you need to prepare spells?
EDIT: I can't believe I got ninja'd with that question.
Other than to just have a thread that reaches 1000+ posts, it has/had the potential to address some of the perceived and actual problems. It could have gone in the direction of how various GMs have dealt with it without having to resort to house rules or how they had to implement house rules. It could have gone on to show what types of campaigns work for various disparities, and how they can increase or decrease that gap. Instead, we're stuck on whether or not a caster can prepare spells more than once in 24 hours and how many they can prepare.
Other than to just have a thread that reaches 1000+ posts, it has/had the potential to address some of the perceived and actual problems. It could have gone in the direction of how various GMs have dealt with it without having to resort to house rules or how they had to implement house rules. It could have gone on to show what types of campaigns work for various disparities, and how they can increase or decrease that gap. Instead, we're stuck on whether or not a caster can prepare spells more than once in 24 hours and how many they can prepare.You mean this thread had anything to do with anything?I lost track...is this thread about how casters are more powerful than martials or is it about how much sleep you need to prepare spells?
EDIT: I can't believe I got ninja'd with that question.
Oh well I can help in that department. This is how martials work in games I run.
Um, it clearly states what it entails right there.Basically all you're doing is essentially adding on to the rules through some arbitrary measurement of what you think is right (i.e. houseruling) and really you're doing a poor job of it.
Okay so the caster can't concentrate on memorizing spells because his bones ache from taking a hard hit to the jaw from an ogre. So how come he can still concentrate on spells? Or in fact cast at all with loud halflings about? These are after all "distractions" to as you define them.
So let's take this further. Let's say that you agree this is a houserule and we can leave it at that. Generally it's just a mean spirited house rule. Why? Let's say I took this here spiked...
@Kirk I picked an arbitrary point to define near death, because I define near death as distracting. Since I consider near death being a distraction a given logically I would be forced to define it as such. I guess you could call that making a mechanic. Since being near death is more of a function of the game contingent upon current vs max hp ratio and the given threats surrounding it. Well I guess I should get everyone together so we can sit down and pick a number to delineate as near death because you don't seem to like the 10%.
You guys are funny.
@Tark. The number is less important than the concept. Good question though why can he cast spells when there are loud noises about but not when memorizing them? Perhaps memorizing spells is more difficult than casting. The important part that you keep cleverly missing is the phrase "free from distractions". The rules state rather clearly no extrapolation or fancy definitions necessary that loud halflings prevent a wizard from memorizing, but not oddly enough from casting. Don't blame me for that. Moreover I'm not trying to balance anything merely interpreting the rules as written in a reasonable fashion. Deciding that my interpretation is mean spirited is to attach a connotation that is neither present in my words here nor in my intention.
On a humorous note to both of you. Do you find logical fallacies effective when you're trying to persuade others of your perspective?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've actually been trying to drop the ring discussions for several pages now but keep getting dragged back in due to my inability to not respond when they say I said something I didn't.
How about you address my point that while a caster may be overpowered at near max levels they are underpowered compared to non casters at lower levels. Who is it afterall that keeps needing to stop to rest at first level. The fighter who can keep fighting as long as someone heals them or the mage/cleric who ran out of spells
My computer locked up half-way through my response...
I don't think that low level casters are any worse off than low level martials. In your example, you say that a fighter can keep going as long as the cleric can keep healing him. That limits the fighter to the cleric's casting abilities. Now we have two characters tied to one class. They are both going to need to rest.
I don't think that the casters are nearly as powerful as they are claimed on the boards. They are powerful, and I won't deny that. I will say that anytime you have to run away to regroup doesn't show how powerful you are. It just establishes that you can run and come up with another strategy another day. While martial characters find this a bit more challenging, a tactical advance to the rear (martials never retreat) can help them accomplish the same thing. The difference is that they just have to be more creative with what they already have.
From my experience, and it is a lot, as long as the GM knows how to create an encounter, adventure, and campaign, there will be room for everyone without having to coddle any class.
If I find a character is over performing, I check the character to make sure that things are Kosher. Usually I find that the problem comes from a misunderstanding of a rule or two or that we were ignoring some rules. If I find a character is under performing, I check the character to make sure that things are Kosher. Usually I find that the problem comes from a misunderstanding of a rule or two or that we were ignoring some rules.
You might notice that those two sentences are pretty much identical. My job as GM is to make sure that the characters are all using the same rules and that they, and I, understand those rules. It's amazing how often someone will take some feats or spells with a brilliant idea in mind, but they want to surprise me with it in game. Then the combination they have been working for doesn't work for some reason. If they would just run these ideas by me first, they can still look clever if it works out. If not, then no one other than me needs to know that they made a choice that stopped the game for a discussion on why a certain combo doesn't work like that.
I think all GMs should read The Art of War. Not to learn how to kill the party, that can be done with a hand wave. They should read it to understand how to deal with a game session. If they can learn how to use the Art of Gaming from the Art of War, they will find themselves in very successful games. Successful means that everyone had a great time.
"So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss. If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose. If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself. "
To put this into game terms:
"So it is said that if you know your players and know your GM style, you can run a hundred games without a single loss of fun. If you only know your GM style, but not your players, you may or may not have fun. If you know neither your GM style nor your players, you will always endanger your game sessions."
Chapter X is all about knowing the terrain. In this context, the game system and the adventure would be the terrain. The better you know it, the better your games will turn out.
Not to derail your derailment too much, but didn't this thread have something to do with non-casters at some point?
Avast he's on to me. It was better than the debate about spell memorization that everyone was arguing and yet not reading. And that was better than the edition wars debate. I'm still not entirely sure what the OP originally wanted to get out of the thread. All I know is he ended up posting repeatedly his dislike for ragelancepounce and how its too powerful if you dual wield. AlecStorm if you're out there come back and help us find our way home.
Good points Bob in regards to knowing ones players and ones style. I would further push that to the players should do this as well.
The highest level characters I've ever played were 16th level in 3.5. That's about when the game got so crazy the GM decided just to start new campaigns, so we never got to "epic" levels.
I had the following characters:
Level 16 cleric
Level 14 ranger
Level 14 illusionist
Level 14 wizard
Yeah, I sorta like casters. However, of the list above for his level, my ranger was by far the most powerful character in any combat. In part that was because he was uber-buffed by the casters, but with all his magic weapons he not only could lay about with melee or ranged destruction, he was able to blast 15d6 fireballs, fire off 12d6 lightning bolts, fly at will, throw up a force shield at need, turn incorporeal, summon greater elementals.... Heck I forget all the crazy stuff he could do.
Because, you know, he used magic items as part of his daily activities. Sure he was limited to what his magic items could do, but man they did a lot.
Honestly, this is a problem with your perception of the hp abstraction. In D&D, 1hp is completely functional. No concentration checks, no attack penalties, no damage penalties, no movement penalties, no penalties to skill checks, etc. Are you saying that you can remain at full capacity while beaten to a pulp except when trying to study your book?Hp damage doesn't translate like that.
I would say that your concept of abstraction is patently ridiculous as there are in game modifiers that describe such events when they occur only they are not necessarily triggered upon hp loss. Since the player knows when they are low on hp then the hp is not that far of an abstraction as if they were truly fully functional then they would not be near death. If hp was not in relation to fully functional health then it wouldn't matter if the wizard was injured when he was memorizing because he would be fully functional.
At no point did I say ruling otherwise was wrong that is just how I read the funny words on the paper and interpret them.
@wraithstrike. You have made it very clear that you are a super human being of concentration according to your perspective and without the drive or will to prove otherwise you'll just have to accept that most mortals, even the cool ones in game, find it hard to concentrate when we do fantastically complicated and difficult tasks when our arms and legs are broken.
Edit: Flint in what way is it unfair to melee types to rule that a caster cannot memorize when on the verge of death due to distraction?
By that logical extension is it unfair for casters to have to make concentration rolls when they get hit? Moreover do you normally have casters trying to memorize when they're on the verge of death? I'm still trying to figure out when I'd have to make this ruling. I'm reasonably sure I wouldn't, but if I did I would rule it a failure because being on the verge of death is distracting. Being distracted should impart no penalties other than...
Pain subsides. If you get hit with a baseball bat, and are asked to immediately concentrate it will probably be hard to do, but using that level of realism would also stop a caster from casting spells.
If you get hit with a baseball bat, and are asked to do something hours later then you should be able to concentrate. Even if you houserule this into a game a caster does not normally prep spells until after 8 hours of rest. Which means the thesis(spell preparation) should not be an issue.
Wraithstrike I realize that which is why I defined it as near death. Being near beaten to death, major car accident, is far more painful than hit by a baseball bat. I can attest to this as I've done both. The realism is minor, costs nothing, is supported but not necessitated by the rules, and would rarely if ever be implemented.
In regards to your second point I made that case above in one of my earlier arguments. Its rather quite difficult for a wizard to accidentally wind up near death and still able to prepare spells due to the resting requirements so as I said then it isn't really a problem.
Edit: Either way the argument is done. Some people think that almost dead shouldn't qualify as a distraction despite the fact that riding on a horse does. Since the core of this argument has revolved around ignoring the clause about distraction and picking a nice functional number to determine when near death it, the argument, has gotten a little worn.
Why is there a problem for people in regards to caster non caster viability? I tend to view the game as a team sport and find the classes, and I know I'll be mocked for this, reasonably balanced in their respective forte if you don't use simulacrum.
I can tell you that I am in constant pain. All day, every day. I tore the tendons in my ankle when I was in the Army and because I had the worst medics available at the time, I did not get proper treatment. Now, 20 years later, I know that it can't be fixed. Every step feels like someone is pounding on my ankle unless it gets really bad, then it feels like someone is taking a knife and twisting it between the bones. It's enough to stop me from walking some days. Even with high doses of pain relievers I can still find it difficult to stand in one place let alone walk.
I have a job where I am not only on my feet all day but I also have to make lots of calculations and multitask. I am a pharmacy technician in a retail pharmacy. I need to know my stuff well and be able to quickly do math. I need to remember which formulas to use (most are ratios but you have to know how to set up those ratios). I have to know how to find recipes for compounding. I have to be able to figure out why the insurance information isn't working. I have to be able to do this while talking to guests on the sales floor. I also have to know where nearly everything is in the store. I don't work in a drug store. I work for a large retailer. I also have to complete Continuing Education every year. In other words, I have to learn knew stuff, while distracted by all those things plus my ankle. The Continuing Education is vital to me helping keep the patient healthy and alive.
If I can do all that while in constant pain, then it shouldn't be a problem for an adventuring wizard to prepare his known spells in the field with some cuts and bruises.
I understand the 10% rule, I just disagree with it. This rule makes it very difficult for low level casters to prepare their spells. Remember that most of them won't have 20 hit points until level 3 or higher (depending on how they use their favored class bonus). In your game, it is better for them to not improve their hit points quickly. A wizard with 6 hit points is either dying or able to prepare his spells. A cleric with 8 hit points is either dying or able to prepare his spells. Once they start getting higher, they might find it better to have more hit points.
If you want to go the route of making it hard to focus if injured, maybe allow a Constitution check (DC 0) with a penalty of -1 for every 5 points they are away from maximum hit points. If they succeed, then they can prepare their spells. I chose DC 0 so that a completely healthy caster will always succeed on the check. If they are higher level and have 101 hit points (about average for a level 15 cleric with a 14 Con would have), and he has 1 hit point left, then the DC is 20. That means he needs to roll an 18. He may want to use some healing. But if he is out, then he can still have a chance.
Personally, I wouldn't worry about it. The best way to nerf casters is to make them follow the RAW. You can then make appropriate adjustments from there.
I can tell you that I am in constant pain.
*hugs Bob* ☆ミ
Bob you're a little off base either off of math or understanding. Although I might not be understanding your examples.
First of all comparing near death to a torn tendon is nowhere near a reasonable comparison. I'm not saying you're not in pain. I'm saying it doesn't even come close.
Edit: As a point of interest you proved my point in your explanation about your ankle. You state that you have to do those things while distracted by those many things and your ankle. A wizard cannot memorize while distracted by raw. That is the reason for the idea of near death in the first place because if a simple torn tendon is distracting than almost dead certainly is.
It doesn't make it any harder for a low level character to prepare spells as resting is typically required to memorize spells. Since resting restores hp I don't really see how, unless they're working for it they can be ready to memorize but also dying.
Level 1 wizard has lets say 9 hp, he got a good roll. The only time he can not memorize spells is if he is at below 1, following the trend of always rounding down. The same wizard at level 2 has a nice 18 another good roll. Then he can only fail to memorize spells at 1 hp. Since resting restores character level hp its very hard for them to be this low after resting.
Bob in my view I am following raw and rai and no one has managed to provide from my view evidence otherwise. I would house rule a concentration check probably. But then I'd also institute a penalty for any number of other actions as well if the character happens to be near dead and trying to do an extremely difficult task.
Edit: Either way I seriously doubt I would change my view without a very good reason so it would probably be more productive if we addressed another caster concern.
The book has never had a penalty for being at 1 hp.
What is or is not near death is also up for debate. Since HP is also a luck based issue, maybe those bruises and muscle pulls or however else you want to flavor loss of HP are adding up, and you can't dodge fast enough to avoid that last attack that takes you out. That is why low hp is not a distraction since it can all be explained by different types of fluff, and fluff is not rules.
To one person 1 hp is near death. To another it means they are struggling to avoid that knockout punch like a fighter on his last legs.