You just saw it done totally over again... Sounds like a different spell to me. Not an awful thing to give people anyway.
|
By the way, since it came up, my players told me the other day that even if you fail this check and have no clue what a certain spell is that is in place or is targeting you, if anyone casts the same thing again, they're entitled to a reroll.Yes. Why wouldn't they? Failing the check doesn't mean the character doesn't know the spell, it means the character couldn't figure out what spell was being bas based on what the character saw/heard or didn't see/hear. A failed check should be thought of as someone missing some of the gestures or not hearing the words correctly or not seeing the component that was used.
So if the caster makes some weird gestures and then throws up a prismatic wall and you fail your Knowledge check to identify the rainbow wall currently in place, even though the Knowledge skill specifically says:
Try Again
No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn’t let you know something that you never learned in the first place.
that you can still try again if they cast it again? Or are we in the silly position where your character says "Gee guys, that second rainbow wall they put up is a prismatic wall for sure, but I don't know about the first one at all."
As for knowing every detail about every spell from every source ever written with 1 rank in cross-class Spellcraft, that seems pretty ridiculous. Even the best rules lawyer players I've ever seen can't know everything, and some of these guys have huge amounts of IRL Spellcraft worth of knowledge about Pathfinder spells. Heck, I'm sure many of you reading this couldn't recite the exact 7 spells in order needed for the prismatic wall from memory, and that one is in the core.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16
|
They also claimed that if it's on their spell list, they automatically know all the parameters of a particular spell. I accepted it at the time skeptically to speed things up but can't find it anywhere. Am I being silly and just glossing past it. Have you seen that rule?
I wouldn't go with that. Not only is it not specified in the rules, but there are probably as many minor variations on spells as there are variant schools of swordplay. Just because you have mastered a spell, it doesn't follow that you would automatically recognize others wielding it. ("That's the Cassomir variation on magic missile, isn't it? I always preferred the northern version: In my experience, its syllables roll more smoothly off the tongue.")
|
|
They also claimed that if it's on their spell list, they automatically know all the parameters of a particular spell. I accepted it at the time skeptically to speed things up but can't find it anywhere. Am I being silly and just glossing past it. Have you seen that rule?I wouldn't go with that. Not only is it not specified in the rules, but there are probably as many minor variations on spells as there are variant schools of swordplay. Just because you have mastered a spell, it doesn't follow that you would automatically recognize others wielding it. ("That's the Cassomir variation on magic missile, isn't it? I always preferred the northern version: In my experience, its syllables roll more smoothly off the tongue.")
They weren't claiming to auto-identify the spell mid-cast from components. Rather, it was more like, to use the prismatic wall example, they wanted to, after failing the Spellcraft and Knowledge: Arcana check, say "well I see it's a rainbow wall so it must be a prismatic wall. Also, I know all seven spells I need to cast, in order, since it's on my spell list."
|
|
** spoiler omitted **First, I think we are talking about two different things.
Let's look at the def of Spellcraft:You are skilled at the art of...
They were using both. When it came to Spellcraft, instead of asking for a reroll when the spell came again, I initially even flat out told them "you can tell it's exactly the same thing she cast that you didn't recognize before but you saw her cast it and it's going the same as before, so you know it's going to be the same thing."
Regarding your second point knowing spells. Yes, it seems a stretch that with 1 rank in Spellcraft you suddenly know every spell. It's equally a stretch that with 0 skill points in K [take your pick] and Take 10 you would know the local laws of every community in Golarian, or be able to identify every single mineral, stone, or gem, or every single ruler and their symbol. etc. etc.
Sure, but the rules explicitly say that you know those things--your examples above are all successful skill checks being made (and it's partially a problem with Take 10--it speeds up the game at the significant cost of realism pretty much any time someone takes 10 lots of times in a row like that). In my example, we're instead talking about failed skill checks. To make it parallel, it would be more like if I had a character with 8 Int who took 10 and failed the DC 10 to recognize a ruler but then when the GM described it said "OK, I still know who that is. My character is a Pathfinder, and according to this one short story, that ruler is mentioned by name in Pathfinder Chronicle #32, which my character would have read." Or for a better example, let's say you're playing one of many scenarios where it calls a DC 25 Knowledge History check to recognize a depiction of Alaznist, the Runelord of Wrath (this is the given DC in the scenario/module/AP). The player might fail it and say "OK, fine, but this is the Year of the Risen Rune, so obviously my character knows what all the Runelords wield because that's common sense. If it's a wild-haired woman with a ranseur, I know this is Alaznist. Alright guys, Alaznist was an evoker who loved fire. Let's break out the resist energy fire right away."
There's nothing to imply that someone with the spell on their list knows every detail about that spell if they fail the check (and I wasn't even the one who said this was after 1 rank in Arcana upthread, in my case, the player originally said he didn't need the rank--he should know his whole list whether he has ranks or not).
|
It works like a magical item, therefore Spellcraft is the skill you would typically use to identify the magical trap spell.Actually I think you are all wrong.
Knowledge: Arcana does not allow you to identify existing spell effects. It allows identification of "ancient mysteries, traditions, symbols, constructs, dragons and magical beasts", no specific mention of spells
CRB, page 101, Table 4-6 Knowledge skill DCs, line 2:" Identify a spell effect that is in place, Knowledge Arcana, DC 20+spell level"
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The knowledge issue is also problematic when the PC has actual experience to draw upon.
Scenario one:
See statue of Lissala with symbol.
Fight Lissalan cultists with same symbol.
See altar with Lissala mural and symbol.
Undo trap by properly aligning Lissalan symbol.
(No spoilers there...I hope.)
Next scenario:
Lissala is a god, but what's she look like? Is that a Lissalan symbol?
(Assuming non-dumped Int, but zero ranks)
It also doesn't account for backstory or PC build.
DC 20 to know rituals of God X.
But I worship God X. I do those rituals.
I'll give you a +5 bonus.
!?!?
(Then again, lots of religious people in our world don't know much about the belief system they ascribe to.)
So yeah, it's messy, but a good GM will be reasonable.
As for Spellcraft, it could very well be the PC looking at the base parts of the spell's structure as the
"Hmmm...that's a fire gesture, so he's tapping the Fire Plane, nice. He's got a nice sliver. He's compacting it with a millisecond release. Oooh, he's repeating the fire gesture. Looks like what I'd call an Empowered Fireball though I've heard it called other things before."
Of course, this would all be sped up to an intuitive level, much like a master craftsman of other sorts would just 'know'.
Spellcraft implies knowing how spells are crafted, which implies knowing the components. Not just V, S, & M, but all the internal variants of same and how they interact and what that interaction will cause. What spell is being crafted by the ingredients being put into it. Miss some of the ingredients, or misjudge some other aspect, and you may get it wrong, then right. Or right, then wrong, and then autocorrected by PC experience having seen the exact same thing before.
It's like yesterday when I showed my unusual PC to a PFS GM I'd just met. He looked it over and nodded, "I see what you're doing." He hadn't seen the combination before (had no 'knowledge'), but could ID the net result at a glance.
Cheers, JMK
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You must be glad Jason that the constitution checks increase in difficulty by 1 each round!
Yeah, I've drowned a player before. That's one of the least heroic deaths I can think of.
Bit drastic, no?
I've had characters drown (Con 8 wizard bull rushed into the ocean) I've killed NPCs with water (slumber hex + sewer = really crappy way to drown). But players?
|
Again, this is incorrect. If you move more than 5', you provoke an AoO as long as the square you are leaving is threatened.He asked about a square being moved INTO. Not out of.
I agree. But by the way everyone is answering the question, and the fact that this new to the rules person is asking this particular question, that the answer of “no” will cause them to think that moving 5’ on the grid (difficult terrain or darkness or not) won’t provoke an attack of opportunity.
It was necessary to clarify that the movement itself COULD provoke an AoO and then tell them exactly why.
You are correct, that for movement to trigger an AoO it must be for moving out of a square, not into.
But in this case, moving out of the starting square and taking 10’ of movement to move into a square with difficult terrain would provoke an AoO from the starting square if that square is threatened.
|
|
Can Spellcraft or Knowledge Arcane (with Detect Magic) be used to identify the spell on a trapped door?Spellcraft yes, Knowledge: Arcana no.
This is actually an incorrect answer.
Spellcraft allows you to identify a magic item's powers.
Knowledge (arcana) allows you to identify an existing spell effect.
So for a magical trap, it would have to be determined if it is a spell in effect, or a magical item before you determine which skill is required to identify it.
As I pointed out upthread PRD says: "Magic device traps initiate spell effects when activated, just as wands, rods, rings, and other magic items do. Creating a magic device trap requires the Craft Wondrous Item feat."
It works like a magical item, therefore Spellcraft is the skill you would typically use to identify the magical trap spell.
Fire trap and alarm can both be considered traps (they can be disabled by a rogue with the Trap Finding ability as well, but you'd need Knowledge (arcana) to figure them out.
|
|
If a player is moving on difficult terrain does moving INTO a threatened square provoke an attack of opportunity? It costs two squares of movement.No. He's not moving into the square and then moving into the square again, he's just moving into the square once and its costing extra movement.
Again, this is incorrect.
If you move more than 5', you provoke an AoO as long as the square you are leaving is threatened.
So even if the grid only shows it as a 5' step, if it is difficult terrain, or it is dark, it is considered movement, not a 5' step.
Because it is movement, and not a 5' step, the origination square you leave would provoke an AoO as long as it is threatened.
Andrew, you need to go back and reread the OP's post. The OP makes no mention of the status of the square being moved out of. They are asking purely if moving INTO a threatened square that happens to be difficult terrain provokes. The correct answer is that the state of the square, being moved into, has no bearing on the question of provoking. Only the state of the square be exited.
EDIT: In rereading this, I think I may come off as a bit of an jerk. Sorry, not my intent.
No worries, I apparently come off the same way sometimes despite no intention for doing so.
I fully understand the OP’s original query. I also fully understand why everyone is saying no.
But saying no, I feel is an incomplete answer, and as such, is negligent in doing so.
I believe I gave the answer that most completely and correctly details how the rule works.
I’d had to have a player read these responses and then come to my table and say, “But they said moving into the square doesn’t provoke” and I’d have to explain that while what they read is true, moving out of the original square did. It would be a confusing and potentially uncomfortable situation for both.
|
|
If someone cast it again your rolling against a different spell. Not too keen on the other point, but if its from your wizard school you get a +2 to know and if an opposition school you get a -5. Makes sense for you to recognize your own spell... but I don't see it in the spellcraft description.Is it really a different spell? Like if an enemy casts prismatic wall and the wizard says "I want to know which seven spells I need to bust up that wall" and rolls and fails, does that really mean that if the enemy casts it again in the same fight, they can roll again?
I would say no. Just like with other Knowledge skills, a reroll requires a new rank in that skill. You either know it or you don't.
|
|
The game mechanics, even the spell names themselves, are all abstractionsGoing to disagree. Nothing in RAW states as such with regards to spell names. And in fact, in 1e D&D, many spells had names based on the ancient wizards who created them, so spell names were unequivocally IC in early D&D.
I see this attitude in homebrew all the time. That and class names are OOC. Sorry, doctors call themselves doctors and rangers call themselves rangers. And wizards and sorcs all know their spells by spell name in the IC world. Which is exactly how they identify the spell when they go to a scroll store and buy the scroll. Which also means they know what caster levels are...because that's how scrolls are priced...based on the caster level.
Having spellcraft ranks does not mean that you know all there is to know about spells, it means that if you make the check you have the player shortcuts needed to interface with game mechanics.That's an interesting interpretation. But suggesting that the only benefit of Spellcraft is for being able to counters-pell and that's it, is not compelling logic. Fortunately RAW does not agree with you. What RAW does state explicitly is that I can identify the spell. In order to identify the spell, I'd have to know it's name.
Now, you can argue that players know spell names and how they are cast, with zero knowledge of how the spell actually works, but there's a certain spell which suggests otherwise:
If recognized as a shadow evocation, a damaging spell deals only one-fifth (20%) damage.Simply knowing what a spell was called wouldn't allow you to know it was illusory. You'd have to know how the spell worked to disbelieve it. The DC for this 4th level spell would be 19. Which means a 1st level anyone could know this spell.
So as implausible as it is, 1 rank in Spellcraft suggests you know how any spell works once you identify it. There would be almost no benefit to a character identifying a...
Are you arguing a theoretical stance on how you think Knowledge skills in relation to spells SHOULD work?
Or are you actually arguing that they work in this way?
Because the rules are quite clear on how Knowledge skills work. You get one check on a particular thing, and if you fail, you can't try again until you gain a new rank in that knowledge skill. You either know it, or you don't.
It doesn't have to make sense. And you can rule it however you want in your home game.
But in PFS, we do things by the rules as best we can (unless specifically noted otherwise in the Guide to Organized Play.)
|
Are we really trying to make magic make sense? A guy mutters a few funny words and suddenly fire appears. It breaks the laws of the universe. Magic is magic, it doesn't have to make sense. The game has its rules for it, so roll the check and lets all take a breath and move on. Its a game, for crying out loud.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If Spellcraft means you can recognize a spell with only a verbal component, no matter the native language of the caster, what does that suggest about the verbal component?
It suggests that the verbal components of spells aren't in any particular language, but are "words of power" of their own -- e.g., wingardium leviosa, expecto patronum, or even abracadabra. :-)
(Or, as Alexander suggests, just roll with it and don't get hung up on that level of detail, esp. in an organized play environment.)
|
Since I was your GM for some this I'll go over the ones that I ruled on.
If a player is moving on difficult terrain does moving INTO a threatened square provoke an attack of opportunity? It costs two squares of movement.
As others have said, it doesn't matter that it was rough terrain or not. The act of moving into a threatened square does not provoke an AoO. Moving out of a threatened square does provoke. If the magus had a reach weapon out then the movement would have provoked. Rules for AoOs are in the CRB page 180.
If you are unconscious and you fall under water do you automatically hold your breath?
As others have said no, and the specific rules for this are covered in the CRB page 445.
Can Spellcraft or Knowledge Arcane (with Detect Magic) be used to identify the spell on a trapped door?
Knowledge arcana lets you identify spell effects, the trapped door did not have a spell effect until it is triggered. Spellcraft lets you identify magical item in your possession, and requires you to thoroughly examine the object. You can't posses the door so you can't spellcraft it.
Can a Familiar with Scent use the casters Knowledge Skill to identify a monster by scent if the caster cannot see the monster?
Under normal conditions yes, but remember where we were(someplace very stinky), and how far you were from the thing(greater then 15 feet). Also remember it can use your ranks (not bonuses), but it uses its own ability modifier.
|
Wait, really? I thought 5ft step worked regardless of difficult terrain.You can only take a 5-foot-step if your movement isn't hampered by difficult terrain or darkness.
correct, there are several ways to ignore difficult terrain for a short distance or for a set amount of time. many characters build around this feature.
|
|
Can Spellcraft or Knowledge Arcane (with Detect Magic) be used to identify the spell on a trapped door?Spellcraft yes, Knowledge: Arcana no.
This is actually an incorrect answer.
Spellcraft allows you to identify a magic item's powers.
Knowledge (arcana) allows you to identify an existing spell effect.
So for a magical trap, it would have to be determined if it is a spell in effect, or a magical item before you determine which skill is required to identify it.
If the trap has not been triggered, the spell has not come into effect yet, and so Knowledge (Arcana) would not be appropriate...spellcraft should work at that point though. Knowledge arcana would identify ongoing spell effects (like a slow spell)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Given that Spellcraft can identify even a still slienced spell, with enough time to counterspell on a readied action, I'd say it is safe to say that it works on non-verbal cues as well.
Maybe your spellcraft recognizes static effects before that lightning bolt goes off? Or you see tell tale flickers of light before the prismatic wall goes up.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **First, I think we are talking about two different things.
Let's look at the def of Spellcraft:You are skilled at the art of...They were using both. When it came to Spellcraft, instead of asking for a reroll when the spell came again, I initially even flat out told them "you can tell it's exactly the same thing she cast that you didn't recognize before but you saw her cast it and it's going the same as before, so you know it's going to be the same thing."
As one of the players at the table I"m surprised I missed this being an issue.
I remember a spell being cast and the wizard and cleric failing to identify. I then remember another spell being cast, OOC we thought it was the same spell, this time we successfully identified it.
All I remember saying was that it was a different spell and so it should have a different roll. If a rogue is going down a hall and disabling a bunch of pit traps I make them roll individually for each one. If a person fights an animal and then fights another one in a different encounter I also make them roll their knowledge check again. Different trigger for the roll different roll. Otherwise a case could be made for "I identified this monster once six months ago so because I made the roll then I automatically know now right?"
Also on the issue of identifying aspects spells post cast I don't really see a big problem with that. Wizard casts a spell and suddenly and orb of fire comes out and blasts everyone. Hmm that must have been some sort of AoE fire spell like maybe Fireball, or possible Flamestrike. Now maybe you shouldn't be able to narrow it down to the spell but I think it is reasonable to figure out general things about a spell effect through observation. Things like damage type, or that person is now harder to hit, or where did they go (invisibility DDoor)?
|
|
If a person fights an animal and then fights another one in a different encounter I also make them roll their knowledge check again. Different trigger for the roll different roll. Otherwise a case could be made for "I identified this monster once six months ago so because I made the roll then I automatically know now right?"
I've actually been pretty consistent on restating the previous results instead of rerolling if you find the same monster more than once in the scenario. I'm also OK with someone saying "I fought these last session and know they have X ability from that" if they have a chronicle I can identify as including that monster.
Also on the issue of identifying aspects spells post cast I don't really see a big problem with that. Wizard casts a spell and suddenly and orb of fire comes out and blasts everyone. Hmm that must have been some sort of AoE fire spell like maybe Fireball, or possible Flamestrike. Now maybe you shouldn't be able to narrow it down to the spell but I think it is reasonable to figure out general things about a spell effect through observation. Things like damage type, or that person is now harder to hit, or where did they go (invisibility DDoor)?
I agree--things like which 7 spells you need to break a prismatic wall I think you need the knowledge skill. I think nothing you did on that front was even remotely questionable either--you played it completely solidly. But even before the second casting (where I allowed the reroll), with only a failed Knowledge check and a failed Spellcraft check, others had literally turned to the page of the spell, looked it up, and used some minor details that the character didn't know from the roll and the player didn't even remember without the book.
|
|
Well on the first one I think we will have to chalk it up to a difference in GMing style. Now that I know your opinion on it I certainly wont mention it at the table again.
As for the second bit:
Oh wow, I had no idea they were doing that. I think it is never ok to look up something in the book when you are trying to identify it.
I had narrowed it down to either a wind wall or a cloak of the winds (suspected windwall). Either way I knew that my very melee character would not be able to shoot the stupid monster.
|
|
Well on the first one I think we will have to chalk it up to a difference in GMing style. Now that I know your opinion on it I certainly wont mention it at the table again.
As for the second bit:
Oh wow, I had no idea they were doing that. I think it is never ok to look up something in the book when you are trying to identify it.
I had narrowed it down to either a wind wall or a cloak of the winds (suspected windwall). Either way I knew that my very melee character would not be able to shoot the stupid monster.
Yeah, I figured from your post that you didn't see it happening.
|
|
They weren't claiming to auto-identify the spell mid-cast from components. Rather, it was more like, to use the prismatic wall example, they wanted to, after failing the Spellcraft and Knowledge: Arcana check, say "well I see it's a rainbow wall so it must be a prismatic wall. Also, I know all seven spells I need to cast, in order, since it's on my spell list."That seems like a reasonable conclusion to jump to on their characters' parts.
They wouldn't know for sure, but absent anything else how I would think a wizard would approach it.
-James
Then what's the point of having Knowledge: Arcana work for identifying and providing facts about ongoing spells if every 1st level wizard knows all the minutiae (like the 7 spells needed to get through prismatic wall, in order) about all the 1st through 9th level wizard spells ever printed (even the ones that say they are rare spells from lost empires or that only one NPC in Golarion researched himself and jealously guards its secrets), even on a completely failed check? Is the skill only for rogues and fighters? If the player doesn't know the spell details, should he be able to search the books to find the enemy's spell (that the character failed to identify) during the game? If the player is a conjurer, should they be able to say "Well, I know I failed the Knowledge: Planes check, but planar binding is on my list and it has low enough hit points to be bound, so I'm going to look up its stats and my character would know them." And these aren't just hypotheticals, even the planes example.
I know I have an above-average memory for creatures and spells in the game, so I could get a lot of advantage from this kind of behavior if I wanted to, even without cracking open a book and making it obvious, but on my part I actually like the fact that the Knowledge mechanics can help me limit what my character would know, so I'm not faced with the problem of metagaming.
|
|
4. The only trick part is in reference to what I said ealier about a player seeing two magic missile and then failing the K. check. If it is some spell they frequently cast or have just cast, I'd probably ignore the roll. But this would be a case by case basis.
I'm with you on #4. I make liberal use of #4, or at least provide circumstance bonuses that make the result a foregone conclusion unless the PC chooses to have no ranks at all in a trained only skill (in which case, it's part of their concept that they just don't understand magic, even their own, I guess).
|
edit:
in re-reading this, I feel a need to add the following.
Don't argue with the Judge. If you disagree, point out the difference if there is time (maybe after the game?), and move on whatever the ruling. Rules arguements are not (often) fun for you, the judge, or the other people trapped in the game with the two of you.
I think you should speak up if the rule
1) Is absolutely 100% clear cut AND
2) Is important to your character
or
3) the mistake gets someone killed.
|
|
edit:
in re-reading this, I feel a need to add the following.
Don't argue with the Judge. If you disagree, point out the difference if there is time (maybe after the game?), and move on whatever the ruling. Rules arguements are not (often) fun for you, the judge, or the other people trapped in the game with the two of you.I think you should speak up if the rule
1) Is absolutely 100% clear cut AND
2) Is important to your character
or
3) the mistake gets someone killed.
I used to be with you on this OR, but the one time I spoke up for #1 and #2 (and not #3), it left a bad taste in my mouth, so I decided just not to play with that character with that judge instead. It was an otherwise-great judge who would keep giving enemies an ur-surprise round that goes before the surprise round, when my character had high initiative and always acted on the surprise round, so having that happen was kind of a big deal for her, even though we weren't losing the scenario. So now I'm more of a #1 and #3 guy. I might do it for #1 and #2 some time again, though. We'll see. I think depends on the judge.