|
Playing last Monday my party got TPK'd as a result of a very large misinterpretation of the rules. Our party of 4 came upon the first encounter and the GM hit us with the enemy's Supernatural Ability. One of the party was affected by the first enemy's SA. He proceeded to do as he was supposed to. Next round the next enemy followed suit and another hero failed their save as well as the first hero. The first enemy at this time attacked the victim of his SA. The hero being affected by 2 enemy SA's could still do nothing as he was affected by the second enemy's SA. On the third round the third enemy did their SA and the 2 remaining heroes failed their saves.
Now this is where everything goes sideways.
At this point the GM ruled that the SA would continue to affect the heroes and so the heroes could not act. With that ruling we now have 4 heroes just standing around being beaten until they are all dead, which is what occurred. TPK bing bang boom!
Now by my understanding of the rules a SA takes a Standard action to perform so by attacking the SA should have it's termination affect take over(which is to last 1 round). But by ruling that the SA would continue indefinitely even while the enemies were attacking it now has cost the players involved two misfortunes.
1. They have to spend 5 PP to retrieve their corpse as well as either 16 PP or 5000+ gp to be raised and then another 8 PP or 2000gp to gain back their newly acquired negative levels.
2. They are now unable to play this scenario again as that would be against PFS rules.
Now I don't mind having a character die, BUT I want it to be a fair and proper death that is in accordance to the rules of game play.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Gresby, your GM played that encounter correctly. The Supernatural Attack in question takes a standard action to activate, but not to maintain. The characters aren't helpless, though, and can defend themselves, but if the whole party is affected, then it's only a matter of time before the enemies' attacks win through.
I think you've got the costs correct.
Having said that, why did you post here? Are you hoping Mike would overrule your GM? That's unlikely, and you'd probably get better results sending him a private message. Did you want to embarrass your GM?
|
On the being helpless subject: Harpy's song specifically states that once the creature is within 5 feet of the harpy, they are indeed helpless to that harpy. So CDG would be possible right there.
Anyway, as Mergy stated this scenario already has a thread in the GM forums and it is probably the best venue to discuss the lethality of it.
|
|
Yup, the GM ran it correctly. I highly suggest buying Seekers of Secrets getting a clear ion stone and slotting it into your Wayfinder.
Wayfinder Resonant Powers (Clear spindle): "Protection from possession and mental control (as protection from evil)." (Pathfinder Chronicles: Seekers of Secrets, pg. 52)
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
As a matter of rules interest (cuz hey, it's what I do), where are people getting the idea that the creature can maintain this effect indefinitely without spending standard actions?
The write-up for the ability says it lasts for 1 round after they stop using it. If we assume the existence of that mechanic has a purpose, then it follows that there would be some reason for the creature to cease the ability. Furthermore, it doesn't say anything about maintaining it being a free action or non-action or any such thing, thus we should default to the standard action per the rules for Supernatural abilities.
Seems to me that the creature needs to keep spending standard actions until the victim is within 5ft (where the ability says they stop defending themselves), and then the suspiciously precise 1-round remainder allows them just enough time to slaughter the victim. (Though if multiple victims arrived at the same time, the creature would only have time to slaughter one, and then the rest snap out of it and "normal" combat ensues. Which seems appropriate, since the classic trope of this creature involves luring one person away to tragic and lonely death, not disabling an entire troop of soldiers and killing them at will.)
What are the thought processes leading to other conclusions?
|
|
As a matter of rules interest (cuz hey, it's what I do), where are people getting the idea that the creature can maintain this effect indefinitely without spending standard actions?
The write-up for the ability says it lasts for 1 round after they stop using it. If we assume the existence of that mechanic has a purpose, then it follows that there would be some reason for the creature to cease the ability. Furthermore, it doesn't say anything about maintaining it being a free action or non-action or any such thing, thus we should default to the standard action per the rules for Supernatural abilities.
Seems to me that the creature needs to keep spending standard actions until the victim is within 5ft (where the ability says they stop defending themselves), and then the suspiciously precise 1-round remainder allows them just enough time to slaughter the victim. (Though if multiple victims arrived at the same time, the creature would only have time to slaughter one, and then the rest snap out of it and "normal" combat ensues. Which seems appropriate, since the classic trope of this creature involves luring one person away to tragic and lonely death, not disabling an entire troop of soldiers and killing them at will.)
What are the thought processes leading to other conclusions?
This is the point that I was trying to get across. I apologize if it didn't come across properly. Why have the 'Lasts for 1 round after they stop' rule if their opponent is already dead and can not hear the song. Seems kind of pointless.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I'm eagerly awaiting the other side of this debate (continue as a free action), because I personally read it in the same manner as Jiggy - that a solo harpy is pretty useless, but a crowd of 4 or 8 harpies cooperating is scary as heck.
A solo harpy (against an appropriate party) can still be a very credible threat; DC 16 against level 3-4 PCs isn't exactly easy (except for the cleric/druid, perhaps). If the whole party fails their saves, then they all walk up, and the harpy kills the most dangerous-looking one with a CdG while the party just stands there. Then you start the "real" fight with one PC dead.
|
Not sure where my understanding it was a free action to maintain comes from but I have had it ruled that way by several GMs so it is widely believed to be the case. Perhaps it has to do with Bardic Performances being maintained as a free action, leading to a deduction that Harpies would work the same way.
Hopefully one of the other GMs has more sound reasoning than mine. Nowhere in the text of Harpies is it specified that it takes a certain type of action to maintain.
|
|
I think another interesting question is whether you are indeed helpless when within 5 feet. I ruled no when I ran this but by the text it sure sounds like you might be:
"Captivated creatures can take no actions other than to defend themselves. A victim within 5 feet of the harpy simply stands and offers no resistance to the harpy's attacks."
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Harpies cant CdG your not helpless if you fail the save (that is explicitly listed in the description "you can still defend yourself"),
Finish reading:
A victim within 5 feet of the harpy simply stands and offers no resistance to the harpy's attacks.
The arguments I have for the free action maintainence is simply that the closest mechanic (bardic performance) is a standard to start and a free action to maintain (bardic performance is equivalent to magical singing).
If it was concentration based then the harpy would have to make a concentration check each time it was hit (as per spells with duration concentration + x rounds). As harpies have no caster level (its a Su ability and they obtain no caster level by RAW from anything else) they obviously cannot make concentration checks (what ability would it be based off? whats the DC?) hence it cannot be a concentration based ability
Now here's an interesting paradox. First, you say the ability works a certain way because it reminds you of some other ability that works that way (bardic performance). Then you critique someone else's description of it resembling another ability that works a certain way (concentration-based spells). So I guess it's only okay to interpret an ability in light of other abilities when you like the result?
So you know, no one was saying that it was based on concentration - someone said it was similar, not that it used that mechanic. So pointing out the flaws of that theory is pointless, because no one has that theory.
----------------
Anyway, the idea of "Harpies sing? Bards sing! They must work the same!" doesn't work. Spells and special abilities in Pathfinder reference each other all the time, and this one references nothing, so claiming a mechanical connection is unfounded. The ability specifies no actions at all, so all we have left is the categorical rules for supernatural abilities requiring a standard action. To my knowledge, there is not a general rule for "maintaining" (I put that in quotes because the term does not actually appear in the ability) as a different action type. (If there were, it would clearly apply, but alas, we're not so fortunate.)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Leaving us with just two options
1. free action (similar to the supernatural ability bardsong, and I would argue all the cleric aura domain powers)
Bardic performance specifies a free action to maintain. The fact that the harpy's ability doesn't is typically an implication of difference, not sameness. As for cleric domain abilities, see below.
2. standard action thats not concentration based (not supported by any rule that I know of)
So you don't know of a rule that a supernatural ability is always a standard action to use? "Using a supernatural ability is usually a standard action (unless defined otherwise by the ability's description)." Standard unless otherwise specified. The harpy's ability does not "otherwise specify".
Its possible the maintainence could be a standard action each round the question would become would you make all supernatural abilities that provide an aura effect to use a standard action each round (Nimbus of light, aura of protection, and various other cleric domain abilities) as these too are Su abilities that dont specify how they are maintained,
Nimbus of light has a duration (rounds per level), implying that once you start it, it continues until you stop, without any maintenance needed. The harpy's ability contains no such text, and therefore cannot be assumed to function the same way.
The same goes for your other example of the aura of protection. You can't keep assuming that differently-worded abilities must function the same.
|
|
I just searched through a zillion threads about this all over the internets and one thing is clear: this is a confusing issue. I can't agree with Jiggy that it must be a standard action because the definition that most supernatural abilities are a standard action does not mean that all abilities are covered by this rule. Quite the contrary it implies there are exceptions.
Most GMs out there seem to rule that it is free to maintain with "common sense" being the common argument. Normally I would scoff at that argument, but we all know of plenty of rules that are not laid out that do require the intervention of common sense. This rule is a great FAQ candidate.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
the definition that most supernatural abilities are a standard action does not mean that all abilities are covered by this rule. Quite the contrary it implies there are exceptions.
Indeed, and said rule then goes on to state that those exceptions will self-identify in their descriptions. The harpy's song doesn't. If a thing can be an exception without being called out as one, then how do you know it's an exception and that something else isn't? In the list of all the things that aren't called out as exceptions, how do you decide that one is and another isn't?
Without something clearly implying otherwise, we have to assume that the rules mean what they say, rather than assume that any idea not explicitly contradicted is a valid interpretation. Occasionally a rule is poorly-written enough that this method leads to the wrong conclusion, but those cases are the minority by a large margin.
Most GMs out there seem to rule that it is free to maintain with "common sense" being the common argument. Normally I would scoff at that argument, but we all know of plenty of rules that are not laid out that do require the intervention of common sense. This rule is a great FAQ candidate.
I will agree that developer clarification would be great. If you start the appropriate rules thread, I'll click the FAQ flag on it. In the meantime (unless I discover you've already done this) I'll see if James Jacobs has an opinion or knows the original intent (remembering, as I'm sure everyone will "remind" me, that his answer would not be an official ruling).
|
|
Yeah I don't entirely disagree with you Jiggy but no one disagrees it is a standard action to activate. The rules for supernatural abilities say nothing about maintaining an effect.
Mostly I think that GMs are ruling in favour of the harsh interpretation because harpies have always been a particularly nasty threat to TPK a party right back to the early days of D+D. To require standard actions each round nerfs them pretty badly and they become much less of a challenge.
I'll create a rules thread.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Already FAQ'd and replied. :)
On a side note, want to take bets on how many times the point I mention in said reply has to be brought up before the usual suspects have to stop pretending it hasn't been mentioned and either come up with something or admit not having an answer?
|
|
As harpies have no caster level (its a Su ability and they obtain no caster level by RAW from anything else) they obviously cannot make concentration checks (what ability would it be based off? whats the DC?) hence it cannot be a concentration based ability
"Using a supernatural ability is usually a standard action (unless defined otherwise by the ability's description). Its use cannot be disrupted, does not require concentration, and does not provoke attacks of opportunity."
Regarding the relevant ability and calculatin the DC; the ability specifically states it is Charisma-based. This helps recalculate the DC if the creature gains a stat boost from a spell, item, or levelling.
The DC is set at [10] + half Hit Dice [3] + stat mod [3] = 16.
Incidentally, the ecology section of Mythic Monsters Revisited had this to say:
"GMs should note that harpies pose more of a danger for low-level parties than their CR suggests, since if everyone succumbs to their captivating song, the party won't be able to defend themselves, and may be slaughtered like livestock. This risk can be mitigated by including only a few harpies among other types of threats, or giving the party some sort of advanced warning or magical protection against the threat. Alternatively, having some of the harpies forgo the use of their captivation powers in favor of regular attacks or magic items can prevent a terrible end to a new campaign."
|
Interesting that Mythic Monsters quote seems to support the free action theory, otherwise how could a harpy slaughter them like livestock?
He could slaughter 1 of them per harpy - stops singing and CDG. The Mythic monsters actually leads credence to it being a standard action, because it mentions having less harpies than the number of PCs as a way to prevent this
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
For those interested, James Jacobs says it's supposed to be a standard action each round, luring the victim in, then stop singing and use that 1 extra round to attack.
|
|
Actually, the harpies can then move far enough to get cover/concealment and start screeching again on the round after the CdG and see who they can catch with the re-save.
Eventually some of the PCs may save. Makes for a VERY long frustrating encounter though.
I'm pretty sure you are immune to an individual harpy's song for 24 hours once you saved once.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I'm pretty sure you are immune to an individual harpy's song for 24 hours once you saved once.Actually, the harpies can then move far enough to get cover/concealment and start screeching again on the round after the CdG and see who they can catch with the re-save.
Eventually some of the PCs may save. Makes for a VERY long frustrating encounter though.
Correct.
|
|
For those interested, James Jacobs says it's supposed to be a standard action each round, luring the victim in, then stop singing and use that 1 extra round to attack.
Interestingly, the Baobhan Sith, which has a nearly identical ability (it has a dance instead of a song), calls out that they can move and act normally, including using SLAs, during the captivate, though it still doesn't call out the action it takes to maintain.
It's obviously up for grabs, but to answer the unanswered question you posed a while back of "Why would it mention that it lasts for one round after maintaining if it's a free to maintain?", I'd imagine if the intent of the original author was free action maintain, then that clause was due to potential clever PC actions to prevent the song and save their allies (such as lipstitch or such).
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Interestingly, the Baobhan Sith, which has a nearly identical ability (it has a dance instead of a song), calls out that they can move and act normally, including using SLAs, during the captivate, though it still doesn't call out the action it takes to maintain.
Link? Can't seem to find the critter, and I'd be very interested in reading it.
|
|
Interestingly, the Baobhan Sith, which has a nearly identical ability (it has a dance instead of a song), calls out that they can move and act normally, including using SLAs, during the captivate, though it still doesn't call out the action it takes to maintain.Link? Can't seem to find the critter, and I'd be very interested in reading it.
Here is the link. I think it's from tomb of horrors complete.
|
|
Note: captivated creatures are NOT helpless, so there is no coup de gras possible. They can take no action "except to defend themself". (Presumably they even retain Dex and Dodge bonuses to AC due to this.)
Please re-read the ability, its the sentence exactly after what you said:
Captivating Song (Su)
A harpy's song has the power to infect the minds of those that hear it, calling them to the harpy's side. When a harpy sings, all creatures aside from other harpies within a 300-foot spread must succeed on a DC 16 Will saving throw or become captivated. A creature that successfully saves is not subject to the same harpy's song for 24 hours. A victim under the effects of the captivating song moves toward the harpy using the most direct means available. If the path leads them into a dangerous area such as through fire or off a cliff, that creature receives a second saving throw to end the effect before moving into peril. Captivated creatures can take no actions other than to defend themselves. A victim within 5 feet of the harpy simply stands and offers no resistance to the harpy's attacks. This effect continues for as long as the harpy sings and for 1 round thereafter. This is a sonic mind-affecting charm effect. The save DC is Charisma-based.
|
|
Note: captivated creatures are NOT helpless, so there is no coup de gras possible. They can take no action "except to defend themself". (Presumably they even retain Dex and Dodge bonuses to AC due to this.)
...except, as already noted, when the target has moved next to the harpy.
A victim within 5 feet of the harpy simply stands and offers no resistance to the harpy's attacks.
Edit: ninja'd
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Here is the link. I think it's from tomb of horrors complete.Interestingly, the Baobhan Sith, which has a nearly identical ability (it has a dance instead of a song), calls out that they can move and act normally, including using SLAs, during the captivate, though it still doesn't call out the action it takes to maintain.Link? Can't seem to find the critter, and I'd be very interested in reading it.
Thanks.
@Rogue Eidolon and anyone else reading: So on the one hand we've got James Jacobs concurring with what a plain reading of the rules lead us to, and on the other hand we have a third-party product with a kind of similar ability except that it specifies the ability to act normally during a dance whereas the harpy's ability does not.
Yeah, I think this one can safely be called "case closed". :)