|
| 51 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was going to title this "James Jacobs, you're wrecking my character!" because sensationalism draws attention! :)
Most forum goers seem to agree with me that the Oracle's Haunted curse names a specific action, "retrieving a stored item", which is listed on the Action table (Move Action, draws an AoO). Drawing a weapon is specified as a separate action in the rules, unless the weapon is stored away in a pack, and only in that case is it treated as retrieving a stored item. So, pulling out a potion, scroll, wand, rod, sunstone/torch, most unslotted magic items, rope, etc would all be hindered, but drawing your weapon usually would not be.
However, James mentioned in a couple posts that in his opinion, "retrieving a stored item" included weapons. My GM is pointing to that (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=308?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Q uestions-Here#15397) as evidence for a broader interpretation of the curse. I feel that if Paizo meant for drawing a weapon to be included, they would have written "When you draw a weapon or retrieve a stored item, it takes a standard action." And since my Oracle, like most Oracles, only has access to Simple weapons, she uses javelins as her only ranged attack option, and this rule would ruin that, not to mention it taking a standard action every time she picks up her staff.
This question has been hotly debated on the forums for a while (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nug3?Haunted-archer-Oracle-question#6 , http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mqn4?Haunted-Oracles-quiver#6 , http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2mmf6?Haunted-Curse , http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l5b2?Oracle-witch-multiclassing-win#25 ) among others, but aside from definitively stating that spell components were never meant to be included, I don't think Paizo has laid the question to rest officially.
Does the Haunted Curse also affect weapons that are not stored away and can normally be drawn as part of a move action, or does "Retrieve a stored item" refer specifically to the action on the Action Table, "Retrieving a stored item" and not include weapons?
Thanks!
|
|
For now, there are things like the spring-loaded wrist sheathes, and weapon cords that can help.
There are some things about the Haunted Curse I am curious about too.
To me, it seems pretty clear that "retrieving a stored item" should refer to the actual listed action of that exact same name, and if drawing weapons and such were meant to be included, it would have said that. Why assume a general, non-specific and broad meaning to a phrase that is the name of a specific action?
Wrist sheathe won't work for me, my character is a Wood Oracle with Wood Bond so she uses a staff and javelins.
|
|
Yeah.
How this curse interacts with things like the Handy Haversack, Quick Draw Shields, and the Quickdraw feat are things I am wondering about.
IIRC shields and the feat don't work on stored items, only readily accessible ones, right? So if the curse's wording only refers to "stored items" (as it should IMO), it has no effect on them at all. As for the Haversack, it would remove the AoO, but still take a standard action for the Oracle to retrieve an item. The Haversack's ability is to remove the AoO, not speed anything up, so there's no conflict there either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now, you see, this *IS* a good thing to use the FAQ button on. Too many posters use it on a thread where the RAW & RAI are clear, but they don't agree with it.
But this is unclear, so I hit FAQ.
It's hardly a curse if these malevolent spirits only hinder you from drawing object from a pouch and not weapons. I think the RAI is at least clear.
It would actually be an overly debilitating curse if it kept you from drawing your weapon imo. A weak curse isn't a bad thing, or at least I don't think so.
It's hardly a curse if these malevolent spirits only hinder you from drawing object from a pouch and not weapons. I think the RAI is at least clear.
I honestly don't think it is.
The Curses are not supposed to be crippling, just an annoyance.
Taking so long to draw a weapon makes weapon combat a less than savory option.
It's hardly a curse if these malevolent spirits only hinder you from drawing object from a pouch and not weapons. I think the RAI is at least clear.
I don't. "Retrieve a stored item" and "draw weapon" are two completely different kinds of move actions. One draws an AoO, and the other doesn't, even. If they meant it to apply to "draw weapon," they shouldn't have used the words "retrieve a stored item" in the curse description.
|
|
The Oracle's Curse is not like Bestow Curse.
It is not meant to fill you with such suck, that you are hardly playable.
I highly doubt the RAI is "haha, dare you to play this class...".
The "hardly a curse if..." comments are just obnoxious.
Right. Also, there is a 2nd part to the curse, anything you drop goes 10' away.
Finally, the benefits of the Haunted curse are very minor, you'll get a few spells added to your list of known spells, starting with 2 cantrips. Whoop de doo! Other curses give much greater benefits, like "Get the Silent Spell metamagic for free on every spell you cast" or "You get always-on Blindsight." Does a few spells known compare to that?
I chose Haunted for the flavor, I wanted her to actually hear the voices of plants. She therefor is a devout carnivore, because she can't stand the screaming when she bites into fruits and veggies! And she talks to trees and plants, which causes others to think she's a bit strange. So there is a social aspect to the curse as well, at least how I'm playing it.
|
I think, if logic were to prevail, JJ meant that stored weapons are the same thing as stored objects. Thus you could use it to block retrieval of a WEAPON just as easily as a Potion. It does not mean that scabbarded swords are stored and cannot be drawn. It means that a bow strapped to your back is stored, your potions are stored, as is the extra axe you brought. Trying to get to any of these because you want to shoot, drink or throw it would be blocked by the curse...
|
|
I think, if logic were to prevail, JJ meant that stored weapons are the same thing as stored objects. Thus you could use it to block retrieval of a WEAPON just as easily as a Potion. It does not mean that scabbarded swords are stored and cannot be drawn. It means that a bow strapped to your back is stored, your potions are stored, as is the extra axe you brought. Trying to get to any of these because you want to shoot, drink or throw it would be blocked by the curse...
Weapons that are stored away in a pack do count as stored objects to be retrieved, yes. But pulling a bow from your back, a javelin from its quiver, or picking up a quarterstaff should NOT be considered "retrieving a stored item" costing a standard action. If drawing the weapon would normally be free, as part of another Move action, it should not count for the curse.
My game is on Friday, I really hope we can get an official ruling before then.
|
|
Let me rephrase that then: Getting an unstrung bow out and making it ready means it is stored. An axe in your pack (completely out of the way) is stored. In other words, again, JJ was simply saying that WEAPONS CAN BE STORED. These stored weapons do fall under the curse's effects. And simply because they are weapons, does not mean they can ignore the curse and be obtained without the curse's effects. All properly "ready to be drawn" items are still able to be drawn. Is that more clear? Hope so, because it is pretty obvious to me that he made a statement exactly the opposite of how you are worrying about it. He did NOT say "all weapons are stored objects". He said weapons CAN BE stored objects too.
"retrieving a stored item" included weapons
It logically only implies that weapons can be stored. It does not logically imply that all weapons are stored (because ones in your hands are not stored either, right?).
|
|
Let me rephrase that then: Getting an unstrung bow out and making it ready means it is stored. An axe in your pack (completely out of the way) is stored. In other words, again, JJ was simply saying that WEAPONS CAN BE STORED. These stored weapons do fall under the curse's effects. And simply because they are weapons, does not mean they can ignore the curse and be obtained without the curse's effects. All properly "ready to be drawn" items are still able to be drawn. Is that more clear? Hope so, because it is pretty obvious to me that he made a statement exactly the opposite of how you are worrying about it. He did NOT say "all weapons are stored objects". He said weapons CAN BE stored objects too.
"retrieving a stored item" included weaponsIt implies that weapons can be stored. It does not logically imply that all weapons are stored (because ones in your hands are not stored either, right?).
First, it's not me "worrying about it", it's my GM that ruled "all weapons count for the curse" based on James Jacob's words.
Second, Jacobs did not specify that "some weapons can be stored", which we already all know and it says in the rules, he said that in his opinion ammunition like arrows wouldn't count, and little shuriken maybe wouldn't count, but all other weapons, including throwing axes and such, would count for the curse. Now, he never said that was an official ruling, just his opinion. But my GM is taking it as an official expansion/clarification/errata to the book, so I need someone official to make a ruling. IMO "retrieve a stored item" = the "retrieve a stored item" action, and there shouldn't even be much of a question about it, but unless someone with standing will say that, I can only point to lots of other forum-goers saying that and that wasn't enough to over-rule the words of James Jacobs in the eyes of my GM.
|
If the curse don't affect weapons, you have the problem of defining weapons exactly:
a rod is a weapon?
only if it is purposefully made as a weapon, like a rod of flailing?
only if you draw it with the intention to hit someone?
a wand?
alchemist fire?
there is a difference if you want to use the alchemist fire to start a fire and not to attack someone?
Wands and rods are treated as weapons for the "draw a weapon" action but not for quickdraw (with the exception of weapon like rods).
If the curse don't affect anything that can be draw under the "draw a weapon" action but only actions under the "retrieve stored item" action the curse will rarely affect the character, essentially making the curse meaningless. The positive aspects of the curse are smaller than those of the other curses, but when the negative part of curse become essentially a non factor when playing they are even excessive.
|
|
IMO "retrieve a stored item" = the "retrieve a stored item" action, and there shouldn't even be much of a question about it, but unless someone with standing will say that, I can only point to lots of other forum-goers saying that and that wasn't enough to over-rule the words of James Jacobs in the eyes of my GM.
OK. So basically we are on the same page and the GM you are playing with isn't. Well. S/He IS THE GM. So there you go. Some GMs are wrong about little things like this. If you want to avoid it, just carry your weapons in your hands... As long as the GM is consistant, and you know how s/he deals with it, it is fine IMHO.
p186 Core Rulebook
"Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or
putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a
move action. This action also applies to weapon-like
objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your
weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or
otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving
a stored item." - the core rulebook pretty much tells you what weapons to treat as stored or not... doesn't get much clearer than that IMHO also.
Spell Components are exempt. It is always a Free/Non Action that is part of the Casting of the spell.
|
|
I appreciate that you're looking for an official answer. Whether you get one that supports your position, your GM might opt to still do things the way he views it.
However, given that he's supporting his position on his perception of JJ's authority, I think the things to bring up are:
1) JJ makes the statement that his rule statements are not official.
2) The post you've linked is later in the discussion. Farther up the thread is this. In the post, JJ states: "..so my preference and suggestion would be to limit the effects of the haunted curse to stored items." In that post, he also makes reference to the curse applying to a bow. Given the context, it looks to me more like he is saying that he would treat a bow as a stored item than that all weapons are stored items.
3) The post that you linked in the OP is a brief response mainly on the topic of ammunition, touching on thrown weapons. The post I've mentioned above is a more thought out reply on the topic. It's easier for brief responses to be ambiguous or to contain an error than a thought out reply.
Good luck.
|
|
Thanks Howie. I already pointed out that JJ says his rulings aren't official, but the GM feels they carry more weight than any ordinary forum-goer.
I think the main point of the post you linked to was that ammunition is not a weapon, and while he'd chose to penalize weapons, he wouldn't extend that to ammunition. Since my character can't use a bow, that isn't going to help me currently, though I suppose it may mean looking into taking martial weapon proficiency later on.
My GM asked me to try and get an official answer, but until then he's ruling this way because of that forum post. Before he saw that, he figured it meant "stored items" too (though it hadn't really come up much yet, it's only a few sessions into a new campaign starting over at 1st level, and the 1st Oracle we've ever had in the game.)
He sounds like he's weighing RAW a little too heavy. Have you tried to talk to him about how that makes an oracle's life extra difficult and the curse isn't supposed to be so debilitating it makes them hard to look at even?
|
|
I pointed out all the things that would fall under "Stored items", like scrolls, potions, misc magic items, etc, but right now that's all theoretical. We're 1st level, and my character started with very little money (Former Pesh Addict Trait because that's what opened her up to "hearing the plants" :) ) so I don't have a lot to pull from my pack. The first few combats haven't required ranged attacks, so it's been entirely my quarterstaff and spells so far. Maybe he's thinking "I'm not seeing any downside to that curse yet..."?
Oh the poor broccoli. Vegetarian resturants must be nightmarish. It might be easiest to say specific trumps general so spring loaded wrist sheaths and weapon drawing make life bearable. On the upside, you've got magic and drawing a weapon is the least of your enemies worries.
Its easy not to see a downside and then overplay it when you feel like someone needs to feel it, and it can be a pretty slippery slope. I feel like if it affects weapons and emergency items from your wrist sheath its a little too much. I really wish I knew what the official official ruling was, but I'm not keen on oracles myself.
|
|
Oh the poor broccoli. Vegetarian resturants must be nightmarish. It might be easiest to say specific trumps general so spring loaded wrist sheaths and weapon drawing make life bearable. On the upside, you've got magic and drawing a weapon is the least of your enemies worries.
Its easy not to see a downside and then overplay it when you feel like someone needs to feel it, and it can be a pretty slippery slope. I feel like if it affects weapons and emergency items from your wrist sheath its a little too much. I really wish I knew what the official official ruling was, but I'm not keen on oracles myself.
I think it's a very flavorful class, more so than Cleric. But it's one of the only classes with an outright negative feature for choosing it. While the benefits gained from the curse may eventually arguably make up for it, it's still a penalty that other classes don't bear. I feel the flavor can make it worthwhile, but the mechanics need to be clearer in this case.
|
|
Yeah, because needing a standard action to pull out that scroll of breath of life is totally a non-issue.
With a range of touch, yes.
How often you are within 5' of a fallen comrade?
Breath of life is a spell that you memorize or learn, not something that yous tore on a scroll hoping that you will be in the right location when it is needed.
Spontaneous casters don't have a lot of slots to give away. Having those rare spells you need once in a long while on a scroll is a good idea. Swift action to pop it out, run up to the dead ally, save the day! Unless your DM rules haunted as shooting it 10 feet away or taking a standard action of course.
One reason why I change Breath of Life to be called Cure Deadly Wounds...
I love the work of him, but James was asked by the design team to no longer answer rules questions because it creates a situation where people start to rely on James for rulings when then the Design team says something else. This creates confusion, and is not the best for the game.
You can see a post by Sean here explaining why this is the case.
The only problem with James answering rules questions is they're often his opinion of how the rule should work, or even his house rule. Then people quote his answer as if it's the official rule, when it isn't, and that makes it harder for when the design team wants to give an official ruling on something.
This is not to say that James doesn't know the rules. He does, and he's a great GM. But he doesn't have to deal with the rules in the maddeningly-precise way that the design team has to.
Everyone uses house rules. Even me, even James, even Jason. But when we (the design team) are giving official rules answers, we need to make sure we're giving a ruling that we want to stick to and that is binding, including for PFS and future products. When we give an official ruling, it's after at least two of the design team have talked it over and reached a consensus. And we don't want to have situations where players (and freelancers) have been using James's ruling, and then the design team contradicts James's ruling—it confuses people and makes us look like the staff is not communicating.
The design team avoids defining things about the Golarion campaign setting.
James avoids defining how the rules work.
FWIW, I recall a post by Sean or Jason about this (or ammunition), but there's whiskey to be drunk, and I've already spent 10 minutes searching for it. Best of luck to anyone else searching!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nevermind about the whiskey. The glass I was cleaning out just shattered in my hand, which I find highly apropos to this discussion.
|
|
I love the work of him, but James was asked by the design team to no longer answer rules questions because it creates a situation where people start to rely on James for rulings when then the Design team says something else. This creates confusion, and is not the best for the game.
You can see a post by Sean here explaining why this is the case.
FWIW, I recall a post by Sean or Jason about this (or ammunition), but there's whiskey to be drunk, and I've already spent 10 minutes searching for it. Best of luck to anyone else searching!The only problem with James answering rules questions is they're often his opinion of how the rule should work, or even his house rule. Then people quote his answer as if it's the official rule, when it isn't, and that makes it harder for when the design team wants to give an official ruling on something.
This is not to say that James doesn't know the rules. He does, and he's a great GM. But he doesn't have to deal with the rules in the maddeningly-precise way that the design team has to.
Everyone uses house rules. Even me, even James, even Jason. But when we (the design team) are giving official rules answers, we need to make sure we're giving a ruling that we want to stick to and that is binding, including for PFS and future products. When we give an official ruling, it's after at least two of the design team have talked it over and reached a consensus. And we don't want to have situations where players (and freelancers) have been using James's ruling, and then the design team contradicts James's ruling—it confuses people and makes us look like the staff is not communicating.
The design team avoids defining things about the Golarion campaign setting.
James avoids defining how the rules work.
Yes, James said pretty much the same thing when I asked him, and I understand that. I hope the design team members are watching these boards and can give an official clarification as they did with the spell components. All it really needs to be is a single line, "Under the Oracle's Haunted curse, retrieve a stored item refers to the action of the same name on the action chart and does not include weapons or ammunition unless they are stored away in a pack."
|
|
Spontaneous casters don't have a lot of slots to give away. Having those rare spells you need once in a long while on a scroll is a good idea. Swift action to pop it out, run up to the dead ally, save the day! Unless your DM rules haunted as shooting it 10 feet away or taking a standard action of course.
You mean that you will keep it in a spring loaded sheath, I hope, as retrieving a stored item is a movement action.
If your GM rule that the haunting spirits don't affect the activation of the spring loaded sheath the speed at which you retrieve stored items don't matter.If the GM follow the text of the curse and that of the wrist sheath, the scroll fly 10' away.
Curse:
Any item you drop lands 10 feet away from you in a random direction.
Wrist sheath:
As a move action, you can bend your wrist to cause some or all of these items to drop into your hand (provoking attacks of opportunity as normal).
For the level a which you routinely keep a breath of life scroll at hand you can have a handy haversack, so retrieving your stuff as a move action is again possible.
I think you're confusing drop (into your hand from the sheathe) with drop (to the ground, after losing your grip).
These are two entirely different things, Diego.
I think you're confusing drop (into your hand from the sheathe) with drop (to the ground, after losing your grip).
These are two entirely different things, Diego.
He prefaced it with "If your GM rule[s]", in a thread where the asker's GM made some uncomfortable rulings that sparked the conversation. I don't think it was confusion.
Dropping the Bass ten feet away would make for some pretty cool acoustics for a bard type.
Bring on the Drop?
Where is my heavy Dubstep when I need it.
For the level a which you routinely keep a breath of life scroll at hand you can have a handy haversack, so retrieving your stuff as a move action is again possible.
Yes, I was refering to the spring loaded sort. I just think its too cool of an item not to have. The haversack on the other hand, is something my dms have always ruled is affected by the Curse.
That said, if i had the power to use my spring loaded wrist sheat to shoot items 10 feet away, I'd probably ask my DM to let me use it as a cursed cannon. Because why not.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For the level a which you routinely keep a breath of life scroll at hand you can have a handy haversack, so retrieving your stuff as a move action is again possible.Yes, I was refering to the spring loaded sort. I just think its too cool of an item not to have. The haversack on the other hand, is something my dms have always ruled is affected by the Curse.
That said, if i had the power to use my spring loaded wrist sheat to shoot items 10 feet away, I'd probably ask my DM to let me use it as a cursed cannon. Because why not.
Because it's 10' in a random direction and you're as likely to hit allies as enemies unless you are completely surrounded by enemies?
I wonder just how forceful the movement is? Imagine if you ARE surrounded by enemies, so you pull out your bag of caltrops and empty it onto the floor... instant 10' r. shrapnel bomb! :)
Still worth it, if only for laughs. A shrapnel bomb of vicious caltrops sounds mean though, great for when you have overland flight for the getaway.
Fuse Grenades falling through a casting of Burning Hands.
Regarding the actual question, I'm a bit torn. The curse clearly does use the verbiage that the retrieve a stored item entry uses, which indicates that it's most likely referring to that specific action (which is separate from drawing a weapon). However, there was this FAQ about spell component pouches. The reason for why it's not affected was because the items are nebulous and not defined, not because the action for getting those was not the "retrieved a stored item" action.
Still might end up looking for that clarification I'm pretty sure I saw previously. how annoying.