|
So I had a new member in my group last Sunday. He is playing a magus and is all well and honky doory. Well it came up that he is claiming he can use spell shield
Spell Shield (Su)
Benefit: The magus can expend a point from his arcane pool as an immediate action to grant himself a shield bonus to AC equal to his Intelligence bonus until the end of his next turn.
to make an attack miss that is already hitting. Say he has a 29 ac, the baddie swings and i say "He got a 32, so he hits you." The player says "nope I will use spell shield to give me 4 more ac to make it miss".
I let it slide for the night but I'm 99% sure that is not correct, Please let me know if I am mistaken.
I understand immediate actions can be used as a reaction but if he wanted extra AC he would have to use the immediate before the attack roll is announce correct?
|
He SHOULD announce it before you tell him whether the enemy hits or not...but that is a GM issue not a "point to a rule" issue.
I'd tell him he has to choose to use the ability prior to knowing whether the enemy hit. Because TECHNICALLY you don't have to say "the enemy rolled 32 and hit you". You just have to immediately roll damage and tell him what he takes as damage. Not to mention if the enemy rolled a 32 odds are the PC actually got hit by the attack but it just didn't pierce his armor...so you can always use word play to trick him (I don't advise this).
he's close but is missing his order of operations a bit. The thing he can use it as a reaction to is the attack, not learning that the attack hits. He could still declare to activate it then, but it wouldn't change what has already happened.
Asta
PSY
An immediate action can be used anytime the player wants, even out of his turn.
From what i read, the Spell Shield arcana doesn't specify that it can be used after the enemy rolled the attack but before the result is declared, or even after the attack has been resolved.
I'ld say that he has anyway to use the arcana before the enemy rolls to attack, even if it is an immediate action.
I think you are technically supposed to pause before the "so he hits you" part specifically to give him the chance to say either "I use spell shield to block it" or "you hit me". If you require the player to say whether he is using spell shield before you say what number you rolled, you render that ability pretty much pointless.
So I had a new member in my group last Sunday. He is playing a magus and is all well and honky doory. Well it came up that he is claiming he can use spell shield to make an attack miss that is already hitting. Say he has a 29 ac, the baddie swings and i say "He got a 32, so he hits you." The player says "nope I will use spell shield to give me 4 more ac to make it miss".
I let it slide for the night but I'm 99% sure that is not correct, Please let me know if I am mistaken.
I understand immediate actions can be used as a reaction but if he wanted extra AC he would have to use the immediate before the attack roll is announce correct?
Pretty much that. Most reaction abilities (such as some oracle abilities or an ability to re-roll a D20 or any specific dice roll) require the ability to be used such as before the damage dice is rolled; however, this is only to have the D20 re-rolled to confirm a hit. This ability is to adjust a specific number at that point in time, not a die roll; there are abilities that allow characters to apply benefits, but must be done before the attack is rolled.
As far as an official ruling, it's not set in stone as to his capability of using Spell Shield during an attack roll, since there is no RAW to specify this regarding that ability; however, one can say there is a blanket rule regarding this, as abilities that function similarly to Spell Shield (which allows the character to adjust a certain number upon an attack) require the character to state they are using the ability before the die is cast.
Personally? I say it functions as the latter, meaning it must be done before the attack is cast (it would function as an attack of opportunity, resolving the effects of Spell Shield before the other action(s) is/are completed). You could allow him to do it, forcing him to drain his Arcane Pool quite quickly if he continues to use it in such a manner, and would teach him a lesson in using it in such an improper and negligent way.
You could also do a Diminishing Returns effect for it, allowing him to do it repeatedly, but for extra costs (an extra Arcane Power per consecutive round it was used), and forcing him to perform other types of actions, but again, it's up to you.
**EDIT**
The thing he can use it as a reaction to is the attack, not learning that the attack hits. He could still declare to activate it then, but it wouldn't change what has already happened.
You could also rule this; allow him to use it, but then state it does nothing to the current roll, as he used his ability after the attack was confirmed to hit (AKA the die was cast).
|
|
I think you are technically supposed to pause before the "so he hits you" part specifically to give him the chance to say either "I use spell shield to block it" or "you hit me". If you require the player to say whether he is using spell shield before you say what number you rolled, you render that ability pretty much pointless.
I think we have a disconnect. I am saying, a guy with a big sword is swinging at you. I have rolled the attack roll at this point. Before I announce the roll he got the player needs to say I'm using my immediate action to grant myself AC bonus until the end of my turn, meaning it will last the rest of the round.
Back on topic, Yes I will pause between rolling and telling him want I got if he wishes to use the ability, I am ok with that. I am no ok with me pausing, him not using the ability, and then I say ok he got x so he hits you. Then the player saying o well I use spell shield so now my AC is y so you miss.
The player is right. The ability would be nigh useless otherwise.
GM: He attacks you with his mace.
PC: I use spell shield.
GM: It's just as well, I rolled a 1 any way.
What a waste of arcana that would be!
Really, it's pretty bad as it is.
Retroactive defense is the whole reason immediate actions exist at all.
Unless it specifically says you need to declare it before you know the result, you don't.
|
Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM.
Swift Action: A swift action consumes a very small amount of time, but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. You can perform only a single swift action per turn.
Immediate Action: An immediate action is very similar to a swift action, but can be performed at any time—even if it's not your turn.
So anytime, yep that attack is gonna kill me, my magic saves me at the last possible instant.
|
|
@RD and Jester
Realistically you don't know if an attack will connect or not until it has, and further more you absolutely won't know if the attack hit you by so much that your spell shield wouldn't block the attack. Am I wrong? You can up your AC at that point but as the attack has already hit it won't help you for that attack.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Am I wrong?
Yes.
Your reasoning isn't bad, but you're starting with a false premise: you assume that the order of operations used to resolve game mechanics out-of-character directly corresponds to the order of in-character events that the PC is experiencing.
This is untrue.
As an example, look at Deflect Arrows or Crane Wing. You "deflect" (presumably with the required free arm) an attack that you already know hit you. The GM announces the result of the attack roll, you determine that it hits, and then you "deflect" it. If your idea of the game-world parallel was correct, then someone with Deflect Arrows actually gets physically struck with an arrow, then pulls it out of his flesh and somehow is unhurt. But obviously that's not what's happening.
Mechanically, the attack "hits", then gets retcon'd to being deflected instead. In the game world, though, that's not what happens: the PC sees the arrow coming and knocks it away before it gets to him.
To reiterate for emphasis: Mechanical processes do not necessarily parallel in-character sequences of events.
I'm sure if you re-read the ability and people's posts with this in mind, you'll easily understand where people are coming from. Hope this helps, and happy interpreting! :)
Absolutely correct, Jiggy and Talon.
However, Talon, I find not telling your players that can sometimes engender trust issues for the same reasons rolling behind a screen can be seen as giving opportunity to fudge/cheat the players.