| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'm wondering exactly how the interplay between these two should work. If you break your word, Legalistic says that you become Sickened for 24 hours. With the Wasting curse, you become immune to Sickened at 5th level.
Curses say that they are so powerful that only the gods can remove them, but how does it work if you have a curse which is preventing a curse from cursing?
Curses say that they are so powerful that only the gods can remove them, but how does it work if you have a curse which is preventing a curse from cursing?
Then you are sickened anyway, in my opinion.
Since the curses specify that they cannot easily be circumvented, another curse is not going to do that, even if the character in any other situation cannot be sickened.
I'm pretty sure you just found a loophole around getting the sickened condition for breaking your word. And all you had to do was take 50% more damage forever! Oh, right, that's awful and in no way worth it...
|
I'm pretty sure you just found a loophole around getting the sickened condition for breaking your word. And all you had to do was take 50% more damage forever! Oh, right, that's awful and in no way worth it...
Wasting: Your body is slowly rotting away. You take a –4 penalty on Charisma-based skill checks, except for Intimidate. You gain a +4 competence bonus on saves made against disease. At 5th level, you are immune to the sickened condition (but not nauseated). At 10th level, you gain immunity to disease. At 15th level, you are immune to the nauseated condition.
LegalisticSource Pathfinder Player Companion: Blood of Fiends
The shackles of Hell impose savage consequences should you violate a covenant, but also imbue you with remarkable guile.
Effect
Whenever you break your word (either purposefully or unintentionally), you become sickened for 24 hours or until you meet your obligation, whichever comes first. However, once per day, you can make a vow to yourself that grants a +4 morale bonus on any one roll you make while trying to fulfill a promise made to another individual.
At 5th level, you gain a +3 competence bonus on Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Sense Motive checks while talking to an individual one-on-one.
At 10th level, you can make a new saving throw each minute to resist mind-affecting effects as your subconscious searches for loopholes.
At 15th level, any creature that violates its freely given word to you takes a penalty to AC, to spell resistance, and on saving throws against your attacks and abilities equal to your Charisma modifier (minimum 1) for 24 hours.
Where is this taking " 50% more damage forever!" you speak of?
HA! I didn't look it up and thought he was talking about Consumed.
I would agree with HaraldKlak on this. You can only be sickened by the Legalistic curse, elsewise you are immune.
The only way to not be sickened by the Legalistic curse is divine intervention, and other immunity, regardless what the source is insufficient to protect you from your curse.
|
|
I would agree with HaraldKlak on this. You can only be sickened by the Legalistic curse, elsewise you are immune.
The only way to not be sickened by the Legalistic curse is divine intervention, and other immunity, regardless what the source is insufficient to protect you from your curse.
The problem is that the immunity that the curse provides IS divine intervention. The OP's question is: Which divine intervention takes precedence?
Assuming they were both provided by the same entity, I would assume that the legalistic curse takes precedence as presumably an entity that would impose that curse wouldn't want to negate its only penalty.
EDIT: As Veldebrand notes, however, immunity is immunity. Nothing in the curses says that conditions they cause cannot be ones you are immune to. I think that by RAW the wasting curse's immunity would function even against the other curse. Note that the curse ability says that only divine intervention can remove or dispel it, but not that other methods can't be used to mitigate or eliminate its impact.
Have the developers ever actually clarified that the line about divine intervention means "no effect can ever help to mitigate or circumvent any of the drawbacks of the curse, so the Lame curse makes you unaffected by Haste" and not "normal ways of removing curses like Remove Curse don't work"?
I would agree with HaraldKlak on this. You can only be sickened by the Legalistic curse, elsewise you are immune.
The only way to not be sickened by the Legalistic curse is divine intervention, and other immunity, regardless what the source is insufficient to protect you from your curse.
The problem is that the immunity that the curse provides IS divine intervention. The OP's question is: Which divine intervention takes precedence?
Assuming they were both provided by the same entity, I would assume that the legalistic curse takes precedence as presumably an entity that would impose that curse wouldn't want to negate its only penalty.
EDIT: As Veldebrand notes, however, immunity is immunity. Nothing in the curses says that conditions they cause cannot be ones you are immune to. I think that by RAW the wasting curse's immunity would function even against the other curse. Note that the curse ability says that only divine intervention can remove or dispel it, but not that other methods can't be used to mitigate or eliminate its impact.
My take on it is this...
"Oracle's Curse (Ex): Each oracle is cursed, but this curse comes with a benefit as well as a hindrance"If you manage to create a closet case where you are no longer affected by your deity-inflicted hindrance, you lose all the spell and benefits that went with it. I know that isn't a RAW argument, but it doesn't take a great deal of mental gymnastics to understand the intent of the curse is to have a negative effect, that can't be blithely ignored.
|
|
Have the developers ever actually clarified that the line about divine intervention means "no effect can ever help to mitigate or circumvent any of the drawbacks of the curse, so the Lame curse makes you unaffected by Haste" and not "normal ways of removing curses like Remove Curse don't work"?
Lame in no way counter haste and vice versa, so there is nothing that the devs need to say about that. What lame do is to reduce you base land speed.
|
|
I would agree with HaraldKlak on this. You can only be sickened by the Legalistic curse, elsewise you are immune.
The only way to not be sickened by the Legalistic curse is divine intervention, and other immunity, regardless what the source is insufficient to protect you from your curse.
The problem is that the immunity that the curse provides IS divine intervention. The OP's question is: Which divine intervention takes precedence?
Assuming they were both provided by the same entity, I would assume that the legalistic curse takes precedence as presumably an entity that would impose that curse wouldn't want to negate its only penalty.
EDIT: As Veldebrand notes, however, immunity is immunity. Nothing in the curses says that conditions they cause cannot be ones you are immune to. I think that by RAW the wasting curse's immunity would function even against the other curse. Note that the curse ability says that only divine intervention can remove or dispel it, but not that other methods can't be used to mitigate or eliminate its impact.
My take on it is this...
"Oracle's Curse (Ex): Each oracle is cursed, but this curse comes with a benefit as well as a hindrance"If you manage to create a closet case where you are no longer affected by your deity-inflicted hindrance, you lose all the spell and benefits that went with it. I know that isn't a RAW argument, but it doesn't take a great deal of mental gymnastics to understand the intent of the curse is to have a negative effect, that can't be blithely ignored.
I'm actually not sure that this is the case. As Roberta Yang notes, the curse's clause against removal might also be there to simply prevent people from attempting things such as casting Remove Curse to get rid of the class feature entirely. In fact, I'm inclined to believe this is the case; after all, nothing about Lame prevents you from benefiting from Longstrider or Haste or some similar movement speed boosting effect (for example).
It is certainly more flavorful to assume the RAI explanation and run with it (in the manner I describe in the post of mine that you quoted), but RAW is RAW and in this case not 100% silly (though somewhat cheesy).
|
I would agree with HaraldKlak on this. You can only be sickened by the Legalistic curse, elsewise you are immune.
The only way to not be sickened by the Legalistic curse is divine intervention, and other immunity, regardless what the source is insufficient to protect you from your curse.
The problem is that the immunity that the curse provides IS divine intervention. The OP's question is: Which divine intervention takes precedence?
Assuming they were both provided by the same entity, I would assume that the legalistic curse takes precedence as presumably an entity that would impose that curse wouldn't want to negate its only penalty.
EDIT: As Veldebrand notes, however, immunity is immunity. Nothing in the curses says that conditions they cause cannot be ones you are immune to. I think that by RAW the wasting curse's immunity would function even against the other curse. Note that the curse ability says that only divine intervention can remove or dispel it, but not that other methods can't be used to mitigate or eliminate its impact.
My take on it is this...
"Oracle's Curse (Ex): Each oracle is cursed, but this curse comes with a benefit as well as a hindrance"If you manage to create a closet case where you are no longer affected by your deity-inflicted hindrance, you lose all the spell and benefits that went with it. I know that isn't a RAW argument, but it doesn't take a great deal of mental gymnastics to understand the intent of the curse is to have a negative effect, that can't be blithely ignored.
It's not blithely ignored. You have to be a level 5 oracle with the wasting curse as your progressive curse to mitigate the impact.
Your reasoning is unduly harsh because you seem to be implying that negative effects cannot be mitigated. The game revolves around getting better abilities, shoring up weaknesses, and improving in effectiveness as you level up.
|
|
I'm actually not sure that this is the case. As Roberta Yang notes, the curse's clause against removal might also be there to simply prevent people from attempting things such as casting Remove Curse to get rid of the class feature entirely. In fact, I'm inclined to believe this is the case; after all, nothing about Lame prevents you from benefiting from Longstrider or Haste or some similar...
But it prevent you for befitting from at least 1 effect that increase you base speed:
Cinder Dance (Ex): Your base speed increases by 10 feet. At 5th level, you receive Nimble Moves as a bonus feat. At 10th level, you receive Acrobatic Steps as a bonus feat. You do not need to meet the prerequisites to receive these feats. Oracles with the lame oracle curse cannot select this revelation.
So the idea seem to be that you can benefit from effects from that mitigate temporarily your curse, but not from effects that make it meaningless permanently, at least if those effects come from the Oracle class abilities.
|
|
I'm actually not sure that this is the case. As Roberta Yang notes, the curse's clause against removal might also be there to simply prevent people from attempting things such as casting Remove Curse to get rid of the class feature entirely. In fact, I'm inclined to believe this is the case; after all, nothing about Lame prevents you from benefiting from Longstrider or Haste or some similar...But it prevent you for befitting from at least 1 effect that increase you base speed:
Cinder Dance (Ex): Your base speed increases by 10 feet. At 5th level, you receive Nimble Moves as a bonus feat. At 10th level, you receive Acrobatic Steps as a bonus feat. You do not need to meet the prerequisites to receive these feats. Oracles with the lame oracle curse cannot select this revelation.So the idea seem to be that you can benefit from effects from that mitigate temporarily your curse, but not from effects that make it meaningless permanently, at least if those effects come from the Oracle class abilities.
But there is no such language in Dance of Blades:
Dance of the Blades (Ex): Your base speed increases by 10 feet. At 7th level, you gain a +1 bonus on attack rolls with a metal weapon in any round in which you move at least 10 feet. This bonus increases by +1 at 11th level, and every four levels thereafter. At 11th level, as a move action, you can maneuver your weapon to create a shield of whirling steel around yourself until the start of your next turn; non-incorporeal melee and ranged attacks against you have a 20% miss chance while the shield is active. You must be wielding a metal weapon to use this ability.
There is also nothing in the lame curse that says you can't take the fleet feat or take a level in barbarian.
I'm actually not sure that this is the case. As Roberta Yang notes, the curse's clause against removal might also be there to simply prevent people from attempting things such as casting Remove Curse to get rid of the class feature entirely. In fact, I'm inclined to believe this is the case; after all, nothing about Lame prevents you from benefiting from Longstrider or Haste or some similar movement speed boosting effect (for example).
It is certainly more flavorful to assume the RAI explanation and run with it (in the manner I describe in the post of mine that you quoted), but RAW is RAW and in this case not 100% silly (though somewhat cheesy).
I acknowledge that I am out on a limb that is quite a bit away from RAW support. I like the flavor text you suggested
It's not blithely ignored. You have to be a level 5 oracle with the wasting curse as your progressive curse to mitigate the impact.
Your reasoning is unduly harsh because you seem to be implying that negative effects cannot be mitigated. The game revolves around getting better abilities, shoring up weaknesses, and improving in effectiveness as you level up.
I probably am being too harsh, but I tend to over-react with shooting down ways to remove penalties and limitations that appear built-in to character classes. I tend to think of those kind of limitation as the cornerstones the designers were using to balance the classes against one another.
Again only offered as my perspective, I don't consider the Rules on the Oracle's curse to be clear enough for any degree of certainty.
|
|
I'm actually not sure that this is the case. As Roberta Yang notes, the curse's clause against removal might also be there to simply prevent people from attempting things such as casting Remove Curse to get rid of the class feature entirely. In fact, I'm inclined to believe this is the case; after all, nothing about Lame prevents you from benefiting from Longstrider or Haste or some similar...But it prevent you for befitting from at least 1 effect that increase you base speed:
Cinder Dance (Ex): Your base speed increases by 10 feet. At 5th level, you receive Nimble Moves as a bonus feat. At 10th level, you receive Acrobatic Steps as a bonus feat. You do not need to meet the prerequisites to receive these feats. Oracles with the lame oracle curse cannot select this revelation.So the idea seem to be that you can benefit from effects from that mitigate temporarily your curse, but not from effects that make it meaningless permanently, at least if those effects come from the Oracle class abilities.
But there is no such language in Dance of Blades:
Dance of the Blades (Ex): Your base speed increases by 10 feet. At 7th level, you gain a +1 bonus on attack rolls with a metal weapon in any round in which you move at least 10 feet. This bonus increases by +1 at 11th level, and every four levels thereafter. At 11th level, as a move action, you can maneuver your weapon to create a shield of whirling steel around yourself until the start of your next turn; non-incorporeal melee and ranged attacks against you have a 20% miss chance while the shield is active. You must be wielding a metal weapon to use this ability.There is also nothing in the lame curse that says you can't take the fleet feat or take a level in barbarian.
The piece about the Cinder dance was put there in the second printing, originally it wasn't there, so I suspect that it is intended for all the oracle mysteries.
About the monk/barbarian/feats thing, I did say: "at least if those effects come from the Oracle class abilities" so I don't see how that will negate my opinion.