I go to my core rulebook pdf, I do a search for land based. I come up with exactly ONE 'land based' highlight. The first sentance after underwater combat. There is nothing on the table that states this. Perhaps you are not reading the table in the Core Rulebook 5th printing?
Getting your information from the D20PFSRD is ok as long as you do not take it's word as RAW. Getting your information from the PRD is also ok as long as you know there are differences in formatting and occassionally the text is off too (I'm looking at you light spell).
- Gauss
Sanakht Inaros, I might agree with you if they did not then add a clause for creatures with a swim speed.
Oh, and bold is the prefered method of emphasis. Caps is interpreted as shouting and is considered rude.
- Gauss
Underwater Combat
Land-based creatures can have considerable difficulty when fighting in water. Water affects a creature's attack rolls, damage, and movement. In some cases a creature's opponents might get a bonus on attacks. The effects are summarized on Table: Combat Adjustments Underwater. They apply whenever a character is swimming, walking in chest-deep water, or walking along the bottom of a body of water.
Here is the whole paragraph. Notice how it starts that landbased creatures have difficulty. If everything else is general then what additonal diffuculty do land based creatures have. As for swim speed there are several way a land based creature can have a swim speed and yet still be land based.
@Sanakht its not that hard to apply bolding and it does help make you seem less abrasive.
Talonhawke, I happen to agree with you that this should apply to land-based only. I just don't see that the wording supports this stands since nothing in either aquatic or water subtypes says otherwise and there are no specific restrictions were placed in the text of underwater combat to exempt this from aquatic or water subtype creatures. As I read it the line of swim speed applies to anything with a swim speed.
- Gauss
Interesting, do you have a link? A shame that isnt in the 5th printing.
- Gauss
If it applys to all creatures then what is the considerable difficulty when fighting in water that land-based creatures suffer? Using the chart with all creatures means that its no harder for them than for anyone else.
Though if you like we can start a thread to try and compile enough requrest to garner a FAQ.
Never mind, found it. That is an excerpt from the GameMastery Guide and as such: awesome. I accept this.
- Gauss
This is clearly a situation where the text from the GMG should be included in the CRB. Oh well.
- Gauss
Adapting to aquatic enviroments
Linkified for ya.
Sanakht, I never got emotional about this. I simply used the information presented where specific overrode general. In the future lets be move civil about this? If you had posted the GMG excerpt from the start much effort of this would have been unneccesary.
- Gauss
When it comes to the rules, all things must be overthought. Otherwise simple thoughts do not come up with all permutations. Much of RAI is 'nuked' (to use your terminology) by RAW. This is the reason clarifications are required. We would still be at that point had it not been for the GMG comment you found.
Clearly, errata is still required since this is not stated in either of the two most common sources. CRB or Bestiary. (GMG is a rarely used resource.)
- Gauss
James has responded. Apparently even he agrees it could be better worded. He seems to have taken a middle stance where natural weapons are not affected but manufactured weapons are.
- Gauss
The table itself states that these penalties are applicable to LAND- BASED CREATURES. How much more implicit do you want? Do you want a full list?
The 'Any thought?' is refered most to questions number 5 and 7 that are still without any answer...
1) I personally disagree with rays not being subject to the underwater penalties but thats just me.
3) My take is that manufactured weapons that have an OR should be able to do whatever is most favorable. Manufactured weapons that have an AND should be affected by what is least favorable.
For creatures the main issues are bite and claw attacks. I can see Bite ignoring the half damage penalty but claws are a questionmark in my mind. However, since both bite and claw do all 3 types at once an argument can be made for the AND statement I made in my last paragraph.
5) I believe that B is correct. The rationale:
If 5A were to be used it would work like this: You are using a fire within 10feet per level as a 'crystal ball' in order to use clairvoyance. However, clairvoyance does not require this so while this could make sense it is a change.If 5B were to be bused it would work like this: You are using clairvoyance normally and the sensor is any active fire on the other end. You can see around that fire 10feet per level. This to me makes alot more sense than 5A and is closer to how clairvoyance works.
7) By RAW at level 20 the Wood Oracle would become immune to her own polymorph effects. Bestiary p301 immunity does not offer any ways to bypass or drop immunities.
However, I would houserule that the Wood Oracle could still do so if he/she desired.
- Gauss
1) Can I ask you why you would apply these penalties to rays?
3) Interesting idea. I'm going to make a thread apart for this question...5) That makes sense. Also, -A- has very limited range, it would be very weak comparing that with the other clairvoyance sense of Wind and Waves oracles counterparts.
7) So immunity to polymorph isn't like having an unbeatable SR?
This is clearly a situation where the text from the GMG should be included in the CRB. Oh well.
- Gauss
Totally. And thanks to everyone for clarification of this underwater combat.
I'm dividing the 3 answers left (3,5 and 7) in 3 different threads, so we can discuss with no confusion.
EDIT: This is the thread for weapons with both type of damage
3) If #1 does not exist, and I am not a math guy, how can a currency exchange system be created for the Inner Sea? What would the value of an Absalon (capital of 303,900 people) gp be in Cheliax (capital of 82,100 people). Using the assumption that countries with more people are wealthier in the Inner Sea.
Relative value of a gold coin won't just be dependent on the wealth of a nation, but also on numerous other factors. These can include, but certainly aren't limited to: Faith in an economy(one might trust a good economic leader not to do things to devalue a coin), the weight of the coin, trust in the purity of a coin, intrinsic magical value of a coin, etc.
If you're planning to run a game where variances in nations' coin values matter, I would almost suggest arbitrarily setting their relative values and throwing in a couple of justifications relating to each coin's relative values.
Otherwise, it's probably easier not to worry about it.
