| 6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
...and if so, is it a visible one?
Wasting Ray (Sp)
At 1st level, as a standard action, you can impose either starvation or thirst upon a living creature you can see within 30 feet. This requires the creature to make a Constitution check each round (DC 10 + 1 for each previous check) to avoid taking 1d6 points of nonlethal damage.
No mention is made of any attack roll, merely a requirement to have a line-of-sight. It looks awfully powerful, especially if no attack is required. And if the effect is invisible, you can make people drop dead around you with no-one being the wiser.
Or is it simply not as potent as it appears?
...and if so, is it a visible one?
Wasting Ray (Sp)
At 1st level, as a standard action, you can impose either starvation or thirst upon a living creature you can see within 30 feet. This requires the creature to make a Constitution check each round (DC 10 + 1 for each previous check) to avoid taking 1d6 points of nonlethal damage.No mention is made of any attack roll, merely a requirement to have a line-of-sight. It looks awfully powerful, especially if no attack is required. And if the effect is invisible, you can make people drop dead around you with no-one being the wiser.
Or is it simply not as potent as it appears?
My GUESS is that there should be an attack roll. There is no initial save, just the round-by-round Con check. That, and the fact it's name has Ray in it, would have me GUESS that is RAI.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
At 1st level, as a standard action, you can impose either starvation or thirst upon a living creature you can see within 30 feet. This requires the creature to make a Constitution check each round (DC 10 + 1 for each previous check) to avoid taking 1d6 points of nonlethal damage. The creature must continue to make these checks until, as a full-round action, it quenches its thirst or sates its hunger (see starvation and thirst). You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier, but can only apply it once every 24 hours to any given creature. Creatures that do not need to eat are immune to this effec
It does not call for a ranged touch attack so it is not a ray.
Many spells and SLA's don't have visible effects, but they still require concentration so knowing who did it is not hard to determine.
All you have to do is eat or drink something to end the effect. Most adventurers should have food or water anyway.
Most adventurers should have food or water anyway.
True, but PCs aren't usually fighting other adventurers. The Kobold guard may have a water bottle on him, but will he also have remembered to pack a sammich? Ditto for people simply out for a stroll, and animals are in an even greater pickle. Plus, starvation or thirst damage cannot be healed; you must eat or drink first.
What bothers me is that this ability acts every round until satiated easily dealing hundreds of points of damage before guard manages to run into refectory. Really, how often people go around with food and water? Not to mention AoO that would eating or drinking in combat cause...
The animal might run away to go kill something. People out for a stroll are not normally attacked by the PC's.
The constitution check is also pretty low. The enemy will be dead from hit point damage through weapons and spells long before this has had a relevant effect, in most cases.
The animal might run away to go kill something. People out for a stroll are not normally attacked by the PC's.
The constitution check is also pretty low. The enemy will be dead from hit point damage through weapons and spells long before this has had a relevant effect, in most cases.
During combat yes. Out of combat it is quite efficient and hard to trace murder weapon - catch someone away from the fridge. No save, no attack roll. After one minute check DC is 20. Soon the target faints from nonlethal damage and starts to take lethal damage - and unless the victim managed to tell someone about gnawing hunger the witnesses probably won't get idea to feed the unconscious victim. And it is being equivalent of 1st level spell (as in general are 1st level bloodline powers).
The more I read up, the less I like this ability - even if it did need an attack roll.
- "Medium characters need at least a gallon of fluids and about a pound of decent food per day to avoid starvation. (Small characters need half as much.)" How long does it take to drink a gallon of water? And who'd have that on him?
- "Characters who have taken nonlethal damage from lack of food or water are fatigued." So a single failed save already costs 1d6 damage, -2 Strength, -2 Dexterity and the victim can't run towards the river any more. Or towards you.
Sating your thirst is not the same as drinking your quota for the day. When I get starved, it just takes a few bites to get something in my system and really, thats all you need for this spell. True, if you cast it on someone that had no ability to get food himself (a prisoner or someone already unconscious like a sleeping guard)it could allow you to kill secretly even in the middle of your party.
Course a small loophole is cannibalism ;} eating your own flesh might stop the spell from eating you o.-
During combat yes. Out of combat it is quite efficient and hard to trace murder weapon - catch someone away from the fridge. No save, no attack roll. After one minute check DC is 20. Soon the target faints from nonlethal damage and starts to take lethal damage - and unless the victim managed to tell someone about gnawing hunger the witnesses probably won't get idea to feed the unconscious victim. And it is being equivalent of 1st level spell (as in general are 1st level bloodline powers).The animal might run away to go kill something. People out for a stroll are not normally attacked by the PC's.
The constitution check is also pretty low. The enemy will be dead from hit point damage through weapons and spells long before this has had a relevant effect, in most cases.
1. I am sure these are all corner case examples which pretty much means they are not game breaking. If I am wrong give me scenarios that happen consistently in a regular game in which this can be abused.
2. At what point does nonlethal damage become lethal? I can find no rules for it.
If a creature's nonlethal damage is equal to his total maximum hit points (not his current hit points), all further nonlethal damage is treated as lethal damage. This does not apply to creatures with regeneration. Such creatures simply accrue additional nonlethal damage, increasing the amount of time they remain unconscious.
I specifically looked for that. I did only look under "Dealing Nonlethal Damage" though.
The ability is not much different than bleed damage from the way I see it though. Most monsters can't heal that either, and it is easier to find something to eat or drink that it is for an NPC to suddenly expect a healer to show up.
PS:Thanks for the link.
You're welcome :) I'm glad to help you for a change ;)
...and if I should weigh in with a personal opinion, I could see this ability being very useful in combat; possible fatigue, making the victim spend a full-round action, plus opening up for possible AoO's is huge. I think the name "Ray" implies that it is an oversight that there is no attack roll required. I think RAI is, that it's a ranged touch attack.
The ability is not much different than bleed damage from the way I see it though. Most monsters can't heal that either, and it is easier to find something to eat or drink that it is for an NPC to suddenly expect a healer to show up.
Stopping bleed damage is (usually) DC 15 Heal check and can be made untrained. I think that more often it would be easier to succeed that check with multiple attempts instead of running around when looking for food. Also bleed effects are blatant attack. This ability is not.
You're welcome :) I'm glad to help you for a change ;)
...and if I should weigh in with a personal opinion, I could see this ability being very useful in combat; possible fatigue, making the victim spend a full-round action, plus opening up for possible AoO's is huge. I think the name "Ray" implies that it is an oversight that there is no attack roll required. I think RAI is, that it's a ranged touch attack.
I wonder if this ability is meant to cause fatigue since it does not mention. That rule is obscure enough that it deserves to be mentioned again. I do think it should be a ray RAI. I will hit the FAQ button if I did not do so already.
The ability is not much different than bleed damage from the way I see it though. Most monsters can't heal that either, and it is easier to find something to eat or drink that it is for an NPC to suddenly expect a healer to show up.Stopping bleed damage is (usually) DC 15 Heal check and can be made untrained. I think that more often it would be easier to succeed that check with multiple attempts instead of running around when looking for food. Also bleed effects are blatant attack. This ability is not.
** spoiler omitted **
Any ability that targets someone is an attack. I was also talking for the purpose of attacking NPC's. Bleed is just as deadly. Not many monsters or NPC's have the heal skill or have clerics to heal them. Even when clerics are around they are usually evil. In my home games I have them prepare cure spells, but not many other GM's do.
I am still not seeing how this can cause an ongoing issue in a regular game. I only see it being a problem in isolated cases.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It doesn't really add much to a regular combat situation, at least not in the hitpoints department - unless everybody's doing nonlethal damage, and that's not likely to happen often. You still force the target to spend an action eating or drinking though, and they do remain fatigued if they fail the (indeed low, but increasing) save. GMs will have to put food and water on their NPCs and intelligent monsters, something that isn't usually mentioned in premade adventures (but stands to reason).
A few (somewhat) realistic combat applications would be:
- Target a mount or an Animal Companion: they can't say what's wrong with them all of a sudden.
- Use it before running away.
- Work together with the Witch: Putrify Food and Drink may not be a waste of a cantrip after all.
All in all, it may not be as bad as it seemed at first. It can be a real killer in specific situation, but then: anything can.
one CdG later and the result is the same.
There wouldn't even be any need for that - the hunger or thirst will kill the victim eventually.
|
Like the OP, what worries me most is how an observer would know what you're doing. Are there rules for using spellcraft, knowledge, or whathaveyou to identify someone using a bloodline power? Obviously the victim should realize that they're starving, but would even they be able to identify you as the cause?
SLAs require no components, nothing verbal, nothing somatic, so casting an SLA like this is merely an act of will with no visible clue that you're the one doing it. That means that the victim cannot determine where the effect came from. If the two of you are alone in an empty cave, he'll probably guess it was you. If you're walking down a crowded street, it will be much harder for him to guess correctly, although if he's observant enough, the fact that you're the only one who stopped moving and spent a Standard action looking at him right at the same time the effect began might tip him off.
Rules for spells define that this is an attack, and rules for Stealth don't allow you to use Stealth while attacking, so you may need something a little more sneaky to remain stealthy. Even accepting the recent clarifications on stealth, if you begin your turn with stealth and then make an attack, you get the benefit of being unobserved for your first attack but making that attack does reveal you to your target, so he might still notice you, even in a crowded street.
As for the no save thing, I'm in the group that agrees that just about every magical effect in this game allows some roll to see if it works, you either need to hit your target with an attack roll or your target gets a save to avoid some or all of the effect. This SLA allows neither, which seems to be inconsistent with the game rules and inappropriate for a level 1 ability (even more considering the potential power of the ability). As such, I strongly feel that it needs either an attack roll or a Saving Throw, and given the name and range of the ability, a Ranged Touch Attack like all other rays makes the most sense. Not RAW, but it seems like it really should be errata'd to be a Ray.
SLAs require no components, nothing verbal, nothing somatic, so casting an SLA like this is merely an act of will with no visible clue that you're the one doing it.
It is generally understood that even if there are no components, casting spells and SLAs is still noticeable.
The rules here are certainly not clear, because they generally assume that the act of casting a spell has some noticeable element. Notice I did not say component, because I think the rules are silent on parts of spellcasting that are codified components versus those that occur without any sort of codification, such as the wiggle of a finger, change in breathing and other flavor bits that happen when a spellcaster makes the magic happen, as it were.
Back to the topic at hand, since the rules are silent here, I think it is well within the GMs purview to impose a penalty to the Spellcraft check to identify a spell without components (V, S, M). Since there is no real increase for spells with just one, I would guess that this penalty is not very large, perhaps only as much as -4.
This is, of course, up to your GM to adjudicate.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
If we assume that the Wasting Ray itself is visible, it can't be used for secret assassinations. So you're attacking someone openly, hoping that (a) they don't have any provisions, and are a couple of miles away from anything edible (b) they won't kill and eat you. This is not a reliable method for killing people.