Removed a bunch of posts. Arguing about syntax and other posters grammar in this manner is hardly productive.
Wow, this has really exploded today.
Just a few points to make.
1. The ability to cast from a scroll using this device is more powerful than the ability to cast from a wand using this device precisely because scrolls can be of any level, meaning you can cast any spell from this device using scrolls. So the argument that it is not overpowered to use scrolls compared to wands is clearly not true. This has nothing to do with the logic of casting one spell vs another, it has everything to do with the inherent superiority of scrolls when compared to wands as spell casting devices. Thus from a pure balance perspective (ignoring physics, logic, common sense or imaginative creativity) there is cause to question using the sheath with scrolls while allowing it to work with wands.
2. The argument about whether rolled up scrolls would fit into and work with the device completely ignores the many times raised issue that the result of triggering the device will be to have a rolled up scroll in your hand, not an unrolled, readable scroll.
3. Reading a scroll is a standard action, except when the spell in question is longer than a standard action, in which case reading the scroll takes as long as casting the spell. For spells which require a standard action, that means reading a scroll takes the same time as casting the spell without a scroll. Arguing that you can unroll a scroll and cast from it in the same standard action is exactly the same as saying you can unroll a scroll and cast an entirely different standard action spell as a standard action. Casting the spell has its own inherent length of time. Claiming that unrolling a scroll is "part of casting the scroll" is completely ignoring this rather obvious fact.
4. The "activating a scroll" process is explicitly described in great detail in the rules, and does NOT include unrolling the scroll.
The real issue here, for me, is not whether you can shoot a rolled up and secured scroll out of a wrist sheath. I have already conceded that I can accept that.
The real issue is where does the unrolling of the scroll occur? The assumption that it occurs as part of the action of reading a scroll is just that, an assumption. Furthermore it is an assumption that, to me, appears to be at odds with the actual written down rules regarding activating a scroll.
Remember, activating a scroll includes the explicit act of casting the spell which already has a defined action.
If you want to argue that unrolling a scroll is a "free action" then make that argument. That's the one that counts.
As far as I am concerned, I don't think this is a game-breaking issue, but I DO think it is power creep when compared to using wands in the same manner. I don't accuse those of wanting to do this as "cheesing up the game" but I do believe this is an explicit exploit where people are trying to read the rules favorably to reach a desired outcome.
That's all. Play how you like, but at least be clear about the points of discussion.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, this has really exploded today.
Just a few points to make.
1. The ability to cast from a scroll using this device is more powerful than the ability to cast from a wand using this device precisely because scrolls can be of any level, meaning you can cast any spell from this device using scrolls. So the argument that it is not overpowered to use scrolls compared to wands is clearly not true. This has nothing to do with the logic of casting one spell vs another, it has everything to do with the inherent superiority of scrolls when compared to wands as spell casting devices. Thus from a pure balance perspective (ignoring physics, logic, common sense or imaginative creativity) there is cause to question using the sheath with scrolls while allowing it to work with wands.
If you want to claim superiority, then you need to demonstrate why the virtues you mention outweigh the restrictions of activating a scroll - namely the caster level requirements, ability score requirements, and provocation of an AoO.
A ranger can activate a wand of CLW at 1st level with 7 WIS without provoking. To activate a scroll of CLW, he needs to be 4th level and have 11+ WIS and will provoke.
Even when talking about using a scroll of a spell that's too strong for a wand, you still need that much higher of a CL and ability score, and you still provoke.
If you demonstrate that this is eclipsed by the benefits of scroll casting, then I will concede your Point #1. If not, then the point is invalid.
2. The argument about whether rolled up scrolls would fit into and work with the device completely ignores the many times raised issue that the result of triggering the device will be to have a rolled up scroll in your hand, not an unrolled, readable scroll.
For this point to be valid, you need to be consistent: when a PC retrieves a scroll from a backpack/pouch/pocket, is the scroll already unrolled? Or do they unroll it as part of another action? If scrolls are kept unrolled, do you account for this in regard to how they're stored on the caster's person? If they unroll it as part of another action, is it the action of retrieving it? If so, then why does it take the same amount of time to retrieve and unroll a scroll as it does to merely retrieve any other item?
3. Reading a scroll is a standard action, except when the spell in question is longer than a standard action, in which case reading the scroll takes as long as casting the spell. For spells which require a standard action, that means reading a scroll takes the same time as casting the spell without a scroll. Arguing that you can unroll a scroll and cast from it in the same standard action is exactly the same as saying you can unroll a scroll and cast an entirely different standard action spell as a standard action. Casting the spell has its own inherent length of time. Claiming that unrolling a scroll is "part of casting the scroll" is completely ignoring this rather obvious fact.
What if it's part of the action of retrieving the scroll? What if it's a free action in itself? What if it's handwaved much like how the right spell components always get into your hand when you reach into your component pouch? For that matter, why do spells with and without material components take the same time to cast? Why don't PCs with Eschew Materials cast any faster? If you cast a spell with material components from a scroll, can you replace the time spent grabbing bat poop with time spent unrolling the scroll?
4. The "activating a scroll" process is explicitly described in great detail in the rules, and does NOT include unrolling the scroll.
Where is unrolling it described? Anywhere? If not, then how do we know if it's an action at all?
The real issue here, for me, is not whether you can shoot a rolled up and secured scroll out of a wrist sheath. I have already conceded that I can accept that.
The real issue is where does the unrolling of the scroll occur? The assumption that it occurs as part of the action of reading a scroll is just that, an assumption. Furthermore it is an assumption that, to me, appears to be at odds with the actual written down rules regarding activating a scroll.
Indeed, this is a relevant question. My responses to some of your numbered points explore this concept.
Remember, activating a scroll includes the explicit act of casting the spell which already has a defined action.
If you want to argue that unrolling a scroll is a "free action" then make that argument. That's the one that counts.
See above.
As far as I am concerned, I don't think this is a game-breaking issue, but I DO think it is power creep when compared to using wands in the same manner. I don't accuse those of wanting to do this as "cheesing up the game" but I do believe this is an explicit exploit where people are trying to read the rules favorably to reach a desired outcome.
I disagree. Someone just reading the rules at face value could easily assume that it worked just fine. The "time to unroll" issue is easy to miss, and requires no slanted reading to dismiss.
That's all. Play how you like, but at least be clear about the points of discussion.
Amen, brotha!
Jiggy, I have previously speculated that since the move action of retrieving a scroll from a backpack is NOT defined, it at least is reasonable to suppose that unrolling the scroll happens then. It also makes sense from a common sense perspective, and there is precedence, such as the rule that a BAB 1 character can draw a weapon as part of a move action.
I'm not saying that's RAW, I'm saying that at least the rules for move action are vague enough to allow it, while the rules for activating a scroll are quite specific and precise and do not include unrolling the scroll.
As far as the superiority of scrolls vs wands is concerned, if you don't accept the bare fact that any spell can be cast as a scroll makes them superior to wands, well, then I don't think there's much point in trying to convince you about any other aspect of the comparison.
"What if unrolling a scroll is a free action in itself?"
Indeed. What if. Unfortunately it is not listed as being a free action. And a simple examination of free actions would seem to suggest that it might be a stretch to assume that unrolling a spell is comparable to, for example, falling prone, or dropping a weapon. As I said approximately 100 posts ago, unrolling a scroll seems to me to most reasonably fit as a "swift action". But that's a problem since using the wrist sheath is already a swift action.
In my opinion to use the scrolls in the manner desired more or less requires defining unrolling a scroll as a free action.
So either rule that way in your home games, or hope for a FAQ or errata that rules that way.
As for me, if I were the developer in charge of determining what unrolling a scroll is, I'm afraid I would rule that it is a swift action. If that ruins someone's plans to use this device as a scroll dispenser, so be it. I won't lose any sleep over it.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Jiggy, I have previously speculated that since the move action of retrieving a scroll from a backpack is NOT defined, it at least is reasonable to suppose that unrolling the scroll happens then. It also makes sense from a common sense perspective, and there is precedence, such as the rule that a BAB 1 character can draw a weapon as part of a move action.
I'm not saying that's RAW, I'm saying that at least the rules for move action are vague enough to allow it, while the rules for activating a scroll are quite specific and precise and do not include unrolling the scroll.
This all makes sense to me. I could see the unrolling being part of the retrieval.
If so, however, then why can't it still be part of the retrieval with the wrist sheath?
As far as the superiority of scrolls vs wands is concerned, if you don't accept the bare fact that any spell can be cast as a scroll makes them superior to wands, well, then I don't think there's much point in trying to convince you about any other aspect of the cmoparison.
I disagree, but the discussion can continue without this particular point getting resolved, I imagine.
"What if unrolling a scroll is a free action in itself?"
Indeed. What if. Unfortunately is it not listed as being a free action. And a simple examination of free actions would seem to suggest that it might be a stretch to assume that unrolling a spell is comparable to, for example, falling prone, or dropping a weapon.
What about drawing an arrow from a quiver? Is it a stretch to assume that unrolling a scroll is comparable to that? Or how about preparing spell components? Those are also free actions, and don't seem to be any faster than unrolling a scroll, given that all you have to do is grip the top of the scroll and let it fall open. I think calling it a free action is well within reason.
Just one minor clarification. I would rule that unrolling a scroll is a swift action that can be performed as part of the move action of retrieving a scroll.
However, in all honesty I think I could be persuaded to rule that unrolling a scroll is a free action purely in pursuit of a game mechanic that is superior to what "common sense" might suggest. That happens a lot in the rules, so it wouldn't break my heart to decide to rule that unrolling a scroll is a free action simply because it makes the game more fun.
I'd have to be convinced that it does make the game more fun though. Not every exploit automatically makes the game more fun. Some people enjoy having to work within limitations of rules that make it a challenge to accomplish things.
What about drawing an arrow from a quiver? Is it a stretch to assume that unrolling a scroll is comparable to that? Or how about preparing spell components? Those are also free actions, and don't seem to be any faster than unrolling a scroll, given that all you have to do is grip the top of the scroll and let it fall open. I think calling it a free action is well within reason.
These would be examples of actions that are ruled to be free actions just to make the game more fun.
Yes, I concede that ruling that unrolling a scroll is a free action is in fact comparable to these rulings. That doesn't mean that I agree with these rulings, by the way. Sometimes I think the game is dumbed down and made too easy at the expense of verisimilitude.
But I suppose that ship has sailed....
I could rule either way. (I don't agree that unrolling a scroll is as simple as you have described. Paper and parchment have memory, unrolling paper or parchment is not simply allowing one end to drop down. Not in the real world. And this doesn't even address the likelihood that a rolled up scroll would need to be secured in some way to work in the sheath.)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Just one minor clarification. I would rule that unrolling a scroll is a swift action that can be performed as part of the move action of retrieving a scroll.
Is there any precedent for a swift action as part of a move action? I can't think of any, but I might be missing something.
However, in all honesty I think I could be persuaded to rule that unrolling a scroll is a free action purely in pursuit of a game mechanic that is superior to what "common sense" might suggest. That happens a lot in the rules, so it wouldn't break my heart to decide to rule that unrolling a scroll is a free action simply because it makes the game more fun.
I'd have to be convinced that it does make the game more fun though. Not every exploit automatically makes the game more fun. Some people enjoy having to work within limitations of rules that make it a challenge to accomplish things.
Well, the only situation I can think of so far where the wrist sheath is actually worthwhile for a scroll is so you can get to a downed ally for a breath of life. That seems to qualify as "more fun" in my mind. I'm unaware of any examples/situations pointing in the opposite direction.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
(I don't agree that unrolling a scroll is as simple as you have described. Paper and parchment have memory, unrolling paper or parchment is not simply allowing one end to drop down. Not in the real world.)
Is this statement made while remembering that scrolls have strips of leather on each end? There would be some extra weight there to help it drop into an unrolled position.
If your contention is that it wouldn't work even with that weight, then I guess it might depend on the material. I may have to go home and do a science!
Well, the only situation I can think of so far where the wrist sheath is actually worthwhile for a scroll is so you can get to a downed ally for a breath of life. That seems to qualify as "more fun" in my mind. I'm unaware of any examples/situations pointing in the opposite direction.
Oh, I could think of quite a few other ways being able to take a move action and still be able to retrieve and cast a scroll would be "more fun" if "more fun" is defined as "able to do more."
When would it be less fun? Well, in view of the vast plethora of rules which have been written to make things easy at the expense of verisimilitude, I suppose that it would only be less fun to a minority of players who still want the fantasy world to have some reasonable approximation of real world effects. I'm sure that number is growing less every day.
I have no doubt that if the developers do rule on this, they will rule the way you prefer Jiggy. That's clearly the direction that modern game designers have chosen to go.
And who am I to object anyway? Just because I think the game has become far too liberal in allowing players to do what they want for the purpose of "having fun" since "having fun" has come to be defined as "doing what they want" anyway.
It's a losing battle. I'm only participating in this so that the actual issue at root gets identified and addressed. I don't have any real objection to either ruling. Although I admit my sense of verisimilitude would compel me to rule against your personal desires.
But hey! I don't make the rules, do I?
(I don't agree that unrolling a scroll is as simple as you have described. Paper and parchment have memory, unrolling paper or parchment is not simply allowing one end to drop down. Not in the real world.)Is this statement made while remembering that scrolls have strips of leather on each end? There would be some extra weight there to help it drop into an unrolled position.
If your contention is that it wouldn't work even with that weight, then I guess it might depend on the material. I may have to go home and do a science!
Jiggy, at some point the extra stuff you put on the scroll to overcome the paper or parchment memory is going to affect what you can put in the sheath.
I would probably rule, just off the top of my head, that you could put a single scroll with weighted ends in the sheath, not four or five. How many spells could fit on that single scroll? I'd have to do some research on that. Maybe two before the scroll is rolling between your legs...
K. I'm done. Gonna go hit the hide button on this thread.
Secure in the knowledge that scrolls in spring-sheaths will never happen in my home games. Have fun, good luck with that, don't come crying to me when your scroll catches fire when you try to read it.
Alitan
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I would probably rule, just off the top of my head, that you could put a single scroll with weighted ends in the sheath, not four or five.
I don't think anyone was going to try to put more than one scroll in the sheath. The only things you can get more than one of is arrows/bolts. So rest easy on that count. :)
How many spells could fit on that single scroll? I'd have to do some research on that. Maybe two before the scroll is rolling between your legs...
Each extra spell adds an extra "foot or so" to the length. I'd personally limit it to single-spell scrolls.
|
I would probably rule, just off the top of my head, that you could put a single scroll with weighted ends in the sheath, not four or five.I don't think anyone was going to try to put more than one scroll in the sheath. The only things you can get more than one of is arrows/bolts. So rest easy on that count. :)
How many spells could fit on that single scroll? I'd have to do some research on that. Maybe two before the scroll is rolling between your legs...Each extra spell adds an extra "foot or so" to the length. I'd personally limit it to single-spell scrolls.
Agreed. A lot of people seem opposed to this because they believe retrieving a scroll with a swift action is too powerful. Keeping it to a single spell scroll keeps it in line with wands.
I would probably rule, just off the top of my head, that you could put a single scroll with weighted ends in the sheath, not four or five.I don't think anyone was going to try to put more than one scroll in the sheath. The only things you can get more than one of is arrows/bolts. So rest easy on that count. :)
How many spells could fit on that single scroll? I'd have to do some research on that. Maybe two before the scroll is rolling between your legs...Each extra spell adds an extra "foot or so" to the length. I'd personally limit it to single-spell scrolls.
Hmm... my only issue with this is that the scroll is still secured in some way, and whatever is keeping it from unrolling in the sheath and buggering up the mechanics has to be removed somehow...
I had suggested a bit of wax before. I suppose that could work. Now we are at the point of asking "what sort of action is it to break a scroll's wax seal?"
Heh... this is like peeling an onion....
I hope we get some sort of guidance from the development team.
At the very least I would say that doing this would require a special scroll with weighted ends and a special break-away seal. That would have to be crafted by someone at some reasonable expense. Such a scroll would be re-usable since spell writing disappears when the spell is cast.
Unfortunately this ruling would not satisfy PFS play since it requires a special type of scroll to be used.
But I'd probably allow that in my games.
I do feel compelled to say one thing here about this whole discussion...
This is the sort of thing that I think a player and a GM should discuss and come to a reasonable, rational, agreeable ruling. I think how Jiggy and I have been discussing this is actually a pretty good example of how two people can push on both ends of an issue and try to squeeze out something that satisfies both of them.
But I do have a concern about how this ends up being utilized by other players who don't go through this process of discussion, debate, negotiation and resolution. They just adopt what someone else has already worked out.
To me this is one of the things that makes the game less vibrant and interesting. Something that would be a unique and interesting ruling in a home game which demonstrates a player or characters' ability to be creative instead just becomes "I read this on the boards and want to do it too...."
I think it tends to reduce the inventiveness of the game.
But I love the internet and the boards and think that they are a great tool for improving game play...
I guess everything has two sides...
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Hmm... my only issue with this is that the scroll is still secured in some way, and whatever is keeping it from unrolling in the sheath and buggering up the mechanics has to be removed somehow...
This makes me curious how you're picturing this sheath. The way I imagine it requires no such intervention. I could try some text art (brace yourself).
__________
{__________
Basically, I see a little "cup" at the back, with the rest of the inside being a smooth surface (it is a "sheath" after all). Springs and gears are behind the cup.
Scroll sits with one end in the cup, and releasing it causes the cup to push forward:
__________
__________{
Pops the contents into your hand without touching anything but the cup and walls. No interference at all. What were you picturing? Exposed gears?
Jiggy, I've actually got some experience with transporting rolled up documents. Usually I transport them in cardboard tubes with no exposed gears, no latches, no mechanics whatsoever.
And they still get all jammed up when I try to pull them out, just due to the friction of the paper moving against the walls of the tubes.
Spring loading them and forcing the paper out at the press of a button would, with no other modification, pretty commonly jam up the paper.
I also used to work at a bank and we had check processing machines. All it took for a check to turn into a miniature accordion in the machines was literally a bit of dust to get into the workings.
That's how I see it. If that paper is not firmly held together so that it operates as a single object, it's going to expand against the sides, create friction, and then all kinds of havoc will happen when you try to force it out of the tube.
That's how I see it. Keep it rolled up tight and it will work fine. Allow it to unroll at all, and it ain't gonna work.
Heh... now I'm having visions at work of how to have a breakaway tube that holds the scroll inside the sheath keeping it from jamming against the sheath walls.... But then it has to have some way of ...
OK, so it's spring loaded. You hit the sheath button, the tube containing the scroll shoots out into your hand, then the tube's internal spring breaks the tube into two pieces which fall to the ground. leaving an unsecured, weighted, rolled up scroll in your hand that you can unroll as a free action....
Heh... It could work. But it would need to be crafted....
Better yet, the actual weights on the ends of the scroll are the two tube elements. The tube shoots into your hand, you grab the top half and allow the bottom half to fall, unrolling the scroll.
Totally plausible. And downright cool to boot. And again I have to point out, reusable.
Problem solved!
|
|
Heh... now I'm having visions at work of how to have a breakaway tube that holds the scroll inside the sheath keeping it from jamming against the sheath walls.... But then it has to have some way of ...
OK, so it's spring loaded. You hit the sheath button, the tube containing the scroll shoots out into your hand, then the tube's internal spring breaks the tube into two pieces which fall to the ground. leaving an unsecured, weighted, rolled up scroll in your hand that you can unroll as a free action....
Heh... It could work. But it would need to be crafted....
If it were possible to do this in organized play I would, because the idea and image are so neat, even if I had to get a large number of extra tubes because they break with each use; unfortunately all something like PFS has is the out of the book devices. I'm not saying I always enjoy some things being handwaved, but for the purpose of something like PFS, I would certainly handwave it for a player of mine.
Michael, I would be OK with that approach. I'm not sure that would solve every situation, but it would probably handle most of them.
|
|
I could see this working with a scroll. I envision the wrist-sheath mechanism to be tube-shaped and the spring just pushes a small, round piece of wood or metal(slightly smaller diameter than the tube) forward to force any forearm sized object into your hand :)
* By RAW it doesn't explain how the spring loaded mechanism is built though, so I guess it's just my opinion.
Scrolls, not being rigid and MUCH lighter than a dagger, present much more resistance to the force of the spring, resulting in torn, crumpled, or simply mis-delivered to the hand when triggered, scrolls.
I haven't bothered to read through this whole thread, so this might have already been pointed out and is very possibly no longer relevant; but it bugs me when people mess up their physics, so I'm going to say it. Sorry if I offend anyone
That being said, an object "MUCH lighter than a dagger" would give considerably less resistance than an object as heavy as a dagger. Go back to your high school physics class-- I=mr² for a cylindrical shell with open ends (aka scroll). You'll notice that inertia (resistance) is directly proportional to mass (which is directly proportional to weight). In other words: as the mass of an object decreases, its inertia and resistance against an outside force also decrease.
As for rigidity, it is true that the scroll starts out rather flimsy, but as the spring compresses the paper into itself, the scroll will effectively become more dense, and as such, more rigid. Maybe you won't have the scroll pop completely out of the sheath, but it will be far enough out for you to grab it in your hand and pull it the rest of the way.
You got the inertia part right, you should have stopped there.
But this has all been covered. For non PFS play I think everyone understands now that they just have to rule for themselves how the scroll would act in the spring loaded sheath, and what sort of action it is to unroll it.
For PFS there needs, at the very least, to be a ruling on what sort of action unrolling a scroll is.
I could see the spring loaded sheath working with a scroll.
In my mind, the scroll would have a dowel joined (glued probably) at each end of the scroll, with the scroll rolled up on one of the dowels.
When the scroll drops into the caster's hand, they grab the upper dowel (the one without the scroll rolled up on it) and let gravity unroll the scroll as the bottom dowel unwinds the scroll as it drops.
This should address the concerns about the scroll ripping as it is pushed out of the sheath, and as it is rolled around a dowel, it should not unroll to fill up the sheath.
I see casters using this for emergency scrolls, like breath of life, or teleport, or word of recall, or etc..
I could see the spring loaded sheath working with a scroll.
In my mind, the scroll would have a dowel joined (glued probably) at each end of the scroll, with the scroll rolled up on one of the dowels.
When the scroll drops into the caster's hand, they grab the upper dowel (the one without the scroll rolled up on it) and let gravity unroll the scroll as the bottom dowel unwinds the scroll as it drops.
This should address the concerns about the scroll ripping as it is pushed out of the sheath, and as it is rolled around a dowel, it should not unroll to fill up the sheath.
I see casters using this for emergency scrolls, like breath of life, or teleport, or word of recall, or etc..
This is sort of what I am describing above, but with a bit more sophistication to avoid any chance of the scroll jamming on the way out. But the principle is the same.
As described though, with a scroll being spring-fed directly into the hand off of a spring plunger, I might well require a dex check to grab hold of it so it doesn't go shooting across the room.... and into the hands of your enemy.... :)
I'm sorry, but how does the relative superiority of scrolls to wands have any effect on how wrist sheaths work? The physics would be the same be it a scroll of create water or a scroll of meteor swarm. It fits the size dimensions cited, and there are simple things that can be done to give it a measure of rigidity and protection (a leather back and wrapped around a mundane arrow or metal rod). It states it works for arrows, but since arrows of slaying are much more powerful than mundane arrows does the wrist launcher mysteriously fail for them too?
It seems like Adamantine Dragon has started with the conclusion that such is overpowered and is finding rationale to make scrolls incompatible with these sheaths based upon this predetermined conclusion.
|
|
As described though, with a scroll being spring-fed directly into the hand off of a spring plunger, I might well require a dex check to grab hold of it so it doesn't go shooting across the room.... and into the hands of your enemy.... :)
Would you require a dexterity check for any item from a spring loaded wrist sheathe?
now the question is could i load a coat pistol in a spring-loaded wrist sheath? for when im caught while cheating at cards.
As described though, with a scroll being spring-fed directly into the hand off of a spring plunger, I might well require a dex check to grab hold of it so it doesn't go shooting across the room.... and into the hands of your enemy.... :)Would you require a dexterity check for any item from a spring loaded wrist sheathe?
Heh, fair question... I was sorta joking though, thus the smiley face at the end of my comment.
As others have pointed out, in the real world devices which slide a weapon into your hand from your sleeve are mounted on a slide the entire time. Some allow the weapon to be retracted as quickly as it is extended.
In reality a device which simply popped an item into your hand as the item is described would lead to lots of missed items falling on the floor or shooting across the room. That's just how people are.
But it's a game... So no I probably wouldn't require a dex or reflex check.
Probably. ;-)
|
|
As described though, with a scroll being spring-fed directly into the hand off of a spring plunger, I might well require a dex check to grab hold of it so it doesn't go shooting across the room.... and into the hands of your enemy.... :)Would you require a dexterity check for any item from a spring loaded wrist sheathe?Heh, fair question... I was sorta joking though, thus the smiley face at the end of my comment.
As others have pointed out, in the real world devices which slide a weapon into your hand from your sleeve are mounted on a slide the entire time. Some allow the weapon to be retracted as quickly as it is extended.
In reality a device which simply popped an item into your hand as the item is described would lead to lots of missed items falling on the floor or shooting across the room. That's just how people are.
But it's a game... So no I probably wouldn't require a dex or reflex check.
Probably. ;-)
Fair enough! I have a lot of trouble understanding tone from posts; that's probably one of the things that makes me so snappy on the internet. I'm sorry that I distressed you earlier, I didn't intend to do so.
Yeah, a real spring loaded device would be prone to misfires and technical difficulties, just like in the real world an archer can't keep his bow constantly strung and a warrior likely can't swing a greatsword 3 times in six seconds. The real world sucks, and that's why I play Pathfinder. ;D
It seems like Adamantine Dragon has started with the conclusion that such is overpowered and is finding rationale to make scrolls incompatible with these sheaths based upon this predetermined conclusion.
Sigh... you know, some people will reach a predetermined conclusion and then twist someone else's comment just to support that conclusion...
Aster, in case you don't realize it, balance is in fact a separate game issue than real world physics. And it is routinely treated that way in the game rules. I was just saying that to address spring sheaths from a pure balance perspective is a completely rational way to view it as a game mechanic.
That's all.
I didn't even say if I thought it SHOULD or SHOULD NOT work that way. Just that attention to balance was a legitimate game concern.
Understand now?
Oh heck, of course you don't. This is the interwebz after all.
Stressed me Mergy? I think not. I have plenty of things in life that "stress me". Internet discussions aren't really one of them. I just have a tendency to be very direct and forceful in my comments. It's a character flaw.
|
After a short bit of research, this is what I was able to gather in regard to unbalancing action economy issues with the spring-loaded wrist sheath and scrolls. Feel free to correct me on any of these points.
~
~
~
For a PFS game, the highest scroll a full-progression spellcaster (12th level) can safely cast is for a level 6 spell (with the normal chance of failure on any higher-level scroll, if such is allowed/available).
In contrast, the highest spell a wand can contain is 4th level. Using a scroll potentially triggers an AoO; using a wand typically does not.
That's about as high as it goes. YMMV
It seems like Adamantine Dragon has started with the conclusion that such is overpowered and is finding rationale to make scrolls incompatible with these sheaths based upon this predetermined conclusion.Sigh... you know, some people will reach a predetermined conclusion and then twist someone else's comment just to support that conclusion...
Aster, in case you don't realize it, balance is in fact a separate game issue than real world physics. And it is routinely treated that way in the game rules. I was just saying that to address spring sheaths from a pure balance perspective is a completely rational way to view it as a game mechanic.
That's all.
I didn't even say if I thought it SHOULD or SHOULD NOT work that way. Just that attention to balance was a legitimate game concern.
Understand now?
Oh heck, of course you don't. This is the interwebz after all.
Looks like I touched a nerve. I don't tend to prefer games with DMs that make arbitrary calls that, as you put it, ignore physics, logic, common sense, or imaginative creativity, but if that's your preference go for it. Those games must suck. Again, as noted, arrows of slaying are much more powerful than mundane arrows, would the device fail if one was inserted? I mean balance is a legitimate concern right?
You do realize that by the time game-breaking scrolls are readily available that gloves of storing are an affordable purchase right? Oh let me guess, they arbitrarily wouldn't work for them either. All the wrist sheath is is a poor man's glove of storing with restrictions on appropriate items, restrictions that do not prohibit scroll-sized items by the letter.
Is there any reason, by RAW (because this is the rules forum), that a scroll could not be kept in a wrist sheath, spring loaded or otherwise? It is not a dagger, dart, or...
1) Have you seen scrolls back then? They were thick, they didn't roll up (inflexible), they were sometimes huge. They were not made out of thin paper. They would not roll up like a wand.
2) Pretend for a second the scroll was on thin paper. The scroll would need to be tied/secured together. Even if you sprung it into your hand, it would take time to unbind the scroll.
3) If you think about it for a moment, even if the scroll were only rolled up, don't you think it would take at least a full round to even unroll the scroll? I dare you to try to unroll something while I hack away at you with a boffer weapon, which will completely ignore the time it take to spring something into your hand and/or read it.
4) Because it's cheese. I'm glad they have the errata in place. Frommage. If it was my home campaign, I wouldn't have allowed scrolls to be in wrist sheaths also. For home campaigns, I'm now considering adding another move action just to unroll a scroll.
I understand why some people would be upset if you built a PC using this concept, but I don't know any reasonable player that wasn't a min-max munchkin that couldn't live with this change.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Is there any reason, by RAW (because this is the rules forum), that a scroll could not be kept in a wrist sheath, spring loaded or otherwise? It is not a dagger, dart, or...1) Have you seen scrolls back then? They were thick, they didn't roll up (inflexible), they were sometimes huge. They were not made out of thin paper. They would not roll up like a wand.
Um, the Core Rules specify the material and dimensions of a scroll:
A scroll is a heavy sheet of fine vellum or high-quality paper. An area about 8-1/2 inches wide and 11 inches long is sufficient to hold one spell. The sheet is reinforced at the top and bottom with strips of leather slightly longer than the sheet is wide.
It's vellum or paper and it's 8.5 x 11. So your point #1 is incorrect.
2) Pretend for a second the scroll was on thin paper. The scroll would need to be tied/secured together. Even if you sprung it into your hand, it would take time to unbind the scroll.
Okay, here's a bit that I actually missed earlier in the dicussion. From the very next paragraph in the scroll description:
To protect it from wrinkling or tearing, a scroll is rolled up from both ends to form a double cylinder. (This also helps the user unroll the scroll quickly.)
Bolding mine. So the rules specify that not only can you roll it up, but unrolling it is fast. How fast has been discussed at length in this thread already, but it's fast.
3) If you think about it for a moment, even if the scroll were only rolled up, don't you think it would take at least a full round to even unroll the scroll? I dare you to try to unroll something while I hack away at you with a boffer weapon, which will completely ignore the time it take to spring something into your hand and/or read it.
3.1) Obviously not (see above).
3.2) Well, the time it takes to spring it into your hand is obviously a swift action, and reading it is already covered by the fact that activating the scroll is its own action and provokes AoO's. So I'm not sure what you're getting at with that sentence.4) Because it's cheese. I'm glad they have the errata in place, because it's pure cheese. If it was my home campaign, I wouldn't have allowed scrolls to be in wrist sheaths also. In my home campaign, I'm now considering adding another move action just to open the scroll.
Waitwaitwait, errata? What errata? Did I miss something?
I understand why some people would be upset if you built a PC using this concept, but I don't know any reasonable player that wasn't a min-max munchkin that could live with this change.
What change? You lost me.
There was errata a while ago. Before, it said
And the spring-loaded one was an immediate action. Now it readsThe sheath can hold one light weapon,
ranged weapon, or wand that weighs less than 1
pound. Alternatively, you may store up to 1
pound of ammunition in a wrist sheath.
The sheath can hold one forearm-length item such as a dagger, dart, or wand, or up to five arrows or crossbow bolts.
The issue, I assume, was that the previous rules let you fit a mithral sickle in a wrist sheath, which is kinda silly.
The current version of the rules are at the same time more specific (it specifies the appropriate length for an object) and more vague (it added in the wording "item such as a...").
It's the "such as" that is allowing this entire discussion.
Removed some posts. Fighty bits ≠ OK.
|
|
Is there any reason, by RAW (because this is the rules forum), that a scroll could not be kept in a wrist sheath, spring loaded or otherwise? It is not a dagger, dart, or...1) Have you seen scrolls back then? They were thick, they didn't roll up (inflexible), they were sometimes huge. They were not made out of thin paper. They would not roll up like a wand.
2) Pretend for a second the scroll was on thin paper. The scroll would need to be tied/secured together. Even if you sprung it into your hand, it would take time to unbind the scroll.
3) If you think about it for a moment, even if the scroll were only rolled up, don't you think it would take at least a full round to even unroll the scroll? I dare you to try to unroll something while I hack away at you with a boffer weapon, which will completely ignore the time it take to spring something into your hand and/or read it.
4) Because it's cheese. I'm glad they have the errata in place. Frommage. If it was my home campaign, I wouldn't have allowed scrolls to be in wrist sheaths also. For home campaigns, I'm now considering adding another move action just to unroll a scroll.
I understand why some people would be upset if you built a PC using this concept, but I don't know any reasonable player that wasn't a min-max munchkin that couldn't live with this change.
PFS has not currently made a decision one way or another actually. Do you have information you're not sharing with us?