-Somebody smash a gem that was used for a magic jar. I made a mend on the gem to be able to sell it back. The dm rule that the gem was in powder and that the spell was not working.
Meh. It's the loss of a gem. Not that big a deal either way. That said, smashing the gem to end the magic jar wouldn't exactly powder the gem either.
-A rogue was escaping by walking on a tight rope. I cast animate rope to entangle the rogue with it. The DM rule a reflex save and the rogue got away.
Well, targets do get a reflex save to avoid being entangled. Is that somehow not reasonable?
-I cast an animate rope on an archer and give command to loop the rope of the bow around the head and the hand of the archer. This time the monster failed the reflex save but at his turn the monster simply move and switch weapon and made a crit attack on a pc saying that the entangle condition does not keep him from doing it.
And that may be true. If entangled, the monster suffers a penalty to hit and reduced movement, but if the creature it attacked was still within that movement range and he rolled the crit, it's certainly possible.
-I hired an hireling porter. The dm ask for a perception check. I roll 3 dice for me, my familiar and the hireling. The dm voiced that it was too much an advantage to have action for me and my familiar avery turn while the other player have only one action so in next combat the hireling end up dead and the body was dragged to not be found and everybody on the group failed their perception to see it.
Jerk move on the DM's part to simply fiat away a hireling because he doesn't want you rolling 3 perception checks. What he should do is roll the hireling's perception checks himself because he's an NPC (and he should run him as an NPC as well). Besides, rolling perception, in most cases, isn't an action...
-My familiar(an imp) is made invisible and sent in a warehouse because we have trouble entering. The familiar see nothing but when the pc finally enter they find the objects easily
Possible depending on perception checks made (if any), otherwise it's fairly pointless. The PCs found the stuff he wanted them to find - who cares if it's the imp or the PCs?
-the combat are made with snow, rain and other condition like that to have no warning that ennemy are coming so I cannot cast in advance spell like mage armor and shield on my familiar to sent it into combat.
Mage armor is typically cast out of combat since it lasts hours. Shield usually cast in combat because it has a short duration. But either way, what has this to do with rain, snow, or other conditions?
-A ninja in the group want to use the poison of the imp. The DM ruled that the poison need a craft alchemy to be weaponized for the ninja to use it. and that we still need to pay for resource to make the poison since the poison of the imp is not the only ingredient. My imp is the only one that can make the poison without being infected so it would take weeks to make a dose.
What's this got to do with spells? I'd probably require some time distilling the poison from the imp too. Just because you milked the imp of some poison doesn't mean its instantly a useful form to be smeared on a weapon and likely to stay there long enough for an attack. Mixing it into some kind of medium to better adhere to a weapon and maybe concentrating it seems perfectly reasonable.
It there some resource to better explain the spell to be sure they will at least do something useful when I used them.
Casting a spell or having some kind of magical power about isn't an auto-win in most situations. You can't think that it is and, I'd say that you appear to be doing so. The DM seems to be treating you fairly in some of the situations you're complaining about and you don't seem to know the rules to your own spells - or at least not the rules that put reasonable limits on them.
|
- Magic Jar uses a material component worth at least 100gp. Mending is a cantrip. Using a cantrip to "undo" the effect of a higher level magic isn't something I'd allow myself. I actually like his explanation.
- Very few spells don't allow a saving throw. If the rogue got one, you can ask for one if you're ever about to be entangled by an animated rope. If it works on NPCs, it works on PCs.
- It doesn't necessarily. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. Depending on what you mean by change weapon, it could work. If he dropped a weapon and used a natural weapon, or if he had one of those weapon chords, that'd be a free action, and he could move and attack.
- Now this one is tougher. It could go either way, I'd recommend you clear it with your DM exactly what NPCs are allowed to do and who is going to control them. Same goes for intelligent weapons. Rule of thumb: Clear things out before they come up, specially with hirelings. In our group, we joke that NPCs are balloons that follow us around. They take no actions and don't participate in combat. And if they do, they get a share of XP and become valid targets. Same applies to familiars, if they take part in the battle, then they are valid targets. If not, we mostly ignore them.
- If you have an imp familiar, you should be at least what, level 7? Mage Armor lasts 1 hour/caster level. Cast it when you start adventuring each day. Unless you're casting from a wand, in which case I start to see his point, you can't count on having a few rounds to buff before every fight.
- Crafting poison is a massive headache and really not effective. For starters, it takes at least one week of work. Imp poison is similar to giant wasp poison, each dose costs 210gp. At a DC 13, you'd need a combined total of 162 on the Craft checks (at one check per week) to finish it. Assuming +15 on Craft(Alchemy) and that you Take Ten, that's approximately 7 weeks worth of work for one dose. Unless the ninja has a specific ability that allows him to create poisons at a fraction of the time... it's not a job for PCs. It's really not worth it.
I get that you're frustrated, and playing should be fun, but again, talk to your DM about what your character can bring to the table. It's the best advice I can give you.
Okay. These are a lot of different scenarios, and very few of them are to do with a difference of opinion between DM and player about what a spell does, so I'll go through them one by one, giving you a second opinion on each.
-Somebody smash a gem that was used for a magic jar. I made a mend on the gem to be able to sell it back. The dm rule that the gem was in powder and that the spell was not working.
Mend is a zero level spell, and it only heals 1d4 worth of hit points of an object. It also only works at all if you have a caster level equal to, or higher than that of the object. It is fairly reasonable to assume that either you did not heal enough damage, or it was created at a higher level than your player. Remember, Magic Jar is a level 5 spell.
-A rogue was escaping by walking on a tight rope. I cast animate rope to entangle the rogue with it. The DM rule a reflex save and the rogue got away.
This is perfectly acceptable. In fact, it is covered quite clearly in the spell description:
"The rope can enwrap only a creature or an object within 1 foot of it—it does not snake outward—so it must be thrown near the intended target. Doing so requires a successful ranged touch attack roll (range increment 10 feet). A typical 1-inch-diameter hemp rope has 2 hit points, AC 10, and requires a DC 23 Strength check to burst it. The rope does not deal damage, but it can be used as a trip line or to cause a single opponent that fails a Reflex saving throw to become entangled.
It sounds to me like the DM was using it as an entangle attempt on the rogue, exactly as it says in the spell description. Personally, I think the DM may have even been a bit generous in allowing you to entangle with the entire rope, rather than with just the first 1 foot, as it says in the PRD.
-I cast an animate rope on an archer and give command to loop the rope of the bow around the head and the hand of the archer. This time the monster failed the reflex save but at his turn the monster simply move and switch weapon and made a crit attack on a pc saying that the entangle condition does not keep him from doing it.
Being entangled does not prevent movement, nor does it prevent attacking. It just makes it a little bit more difficult to do so. Did you even need to make a touch attack on the rope to cast this spell? Again, I think the DM may have been a little bit generous in allowing the entangle attempt to start with, considering there's so little "rope" to work with on a bow, and personally, I would've been hard pressed to consider the taught string of a bow to even be considered a "rope" at all.
-I hired an hireling porter. The dm ask for a perception check. I roll 3 dice for me, my familiar and the hireling. The dm voiced that it was too much an advantage to have action for me and my familiar avery turn while the other player have only one action so in next combat the hireling end up dead and the body was dragged to not be found and everybody on the group failed their perception to see it.
This is possibly the first time I might agree with you over the DM. But only in the sense that his method of solving the problem was obviously pretty cheesy. Buying a hireling does not mean you've bought yourself a brand new character to play with. The hireling is an NPC. You do not control his every movements for this very reason. It's too much for a player to be able to do each turn. It is really up to the DM what the hireling does, and when he does it. You just pay the guy's bills, so he's a little more likely to do what you ask him to. Solving the "too many player actions" problem by having the guy mysteriously "disappear" is definitely a pretty low blow.
-My familiar(an imp) is made invisible and sent in a warehouse because we have trouble entering. The familiar see nothing but when the pc finally enter they find the objects easily
Imps make the occasional bad perception roll too. I think you're just not trusting your DM here, possibly due to previous differences of opinion. The imp failed the roll, and you're assuming that's because the DM was cheating. Whether this is the case, or not. That's a pretty bad attitude to bring to a game.
-the combat are made with snow, rain and other condition like that to have no warning that ennemy are coming so I cannot cast in advance spell like mage armor and shield on my familiar to sent it into combat.
I honestly have no idea what you think is wrong with this situation. Would you prefer the monster send you a postcard, warning you they're about to attack? "-Dear Valiant Heroes. Weather is fine. Wish you were here. Don't forget to cast Mage Armor. Sincerely - Azyxlatl The Merciless."
-A ninja in the group want to use the poison of the imp. The DM ruled that the poison need a craft alchemy to be weaponized for the ninja to use it. and that we still need to pay for resource to make the poison since the poison of the imp is not the only ingredient. My imp is the only one that can make the poison without being infected so it would take weeks to make a dose.
Again, I think this is probably fair enough. I can imagine the act of juicing the imp for poison would be a fairly traumatic experience for the little guy. He's not exactly a weaponised vending machine. It's kinda cheap to expect him to be a source of poison for free. If I were the DM, I'd allow it, but at the risk of doing some kind of lasting damage to the imp during the act of "juicing". But that's just me. Your DM is playing by the book. Which brings me to....
It there some resource to better explain the spell to be sure they will at least do something useful when I used them.
Yeah.
It's called the PRD.And most of these problems seem to actually stem from you trying to get low level spells and abilities to do better things than they are capable of as written.
Somebody smash a gem that was used for a magic jar. I made a mend on the gem to be able to sell it back. The dm rule that the gem was in powder and that the spell was not working.
Mending should still work, so long as you have all of the pieces of the smashed gem.
A rogue was escaping by walking on a tight rope. I cast animate rope to entangle the rogue with it. The DM rule a reflex save and the rogue got away.
The spell stipulates that a foe gets a reflex saving throw to avoid being entangled; this is how the spell works, and yoru GM is 100% correct here. The Rogue could also escape afterwards with a DC 20 escape artist check.
I cast an animate rope on an archer and give command to loop the rope of the bow around the head and the hand of the archer. This time the monster failed the reflex save but at his turn the monster simply move and switch weapon and made a crit attack on a pc saying that the entangle condition does not keep him from doing it.
First of all, Animate Rope cannot affect objects being carried or worn by a creature, so you shouldn't have been able to target his bow in the first place.
In any case, none of these actions are prevented by the entangled condition. Your GM is absolutely correct; the only penalty this guy gets is half speed, cannot run or charge, -2 to attack rolls, and -4 to dexterity.
I roll 3 dice for me, my familiar and the hireling. The dm voiced that it was too much an advantage to have action for me and my familiar avery turn while the other player have only one action so in next combat the hireling end up dead and the body was dragged to not be found and everybody on the group failed their perception to see it.
This is a poor way of handling the situation. If the GM is concerned about you controlling too many characters, he should have taken direct control of the porter.
My familiar(an imp) is made invisible and sent in a warehouse because we have trouble entering. The familiar see nothing but when the pc finally enter they find the objects easily
Sounds like silliness on the GM's part, but without seeing the full exchange it's hard to say for sure.
-the combat are made with snow, rain and other condition like that to have no warning that ennemy are coming so I cannot cast in advance spell like mage armor and shield on my familiar to sent it into combat.
Mage Armor lasts 1 hour per level. If you're a high enough level to qualify for an Imp familiar, that's at least 7 hours. You should be able to cast this well ahead of time.
Otherwise, these sound like regular combat encounters. Bad weather is normal in winter, and ambushes do happen. Sounds like it didn't kill you, so the GM probably was doing a good job at making you feel more danger than there actually was.
"The rope can enwrap only a creature or an object within 1 foot of it—it does not snake outward—so it must be thrown near the intended target. Doing so requires a successful ranged touch attack roll (range increment 10 feet). A typical 1-inch-diameter hemp rope has 2 hit points, AC 10, and requires a DC 23 Strength check to burst it. The rope does not deal damage, but it can be used as a trip line or to cause a single opponent that fails a Reflex saving throw to become entangled.It sounds to me like the DM was using it as an entangle attempt on the rogue, exactly as it says in the spell description. Personally, I think the DM may have even been a bit generous in allowing you to entangle with the entire rope, rather than with just the first 1 foot, as it says in the PRD.
Just clearing up what appears to be a slight misreading here: The target has to be within 1 foot of the rope (and in the given case the target was on the rope, so this was clearly the case); there's no limit to the useable length of the rope.
I otherwise agree completely with your post :)
The mending spell is not as powerful as you'd like to think:
Damaged Objects: A damaged object remains functional with the broken condition until the item's hit points are reduced to 0, at which point it is destroyed.
Damaged (but not destroyed) objects can be repaired with the Craft skill and a number of spells.
This spell repairs damaged objects, restoring 1d4 hit points to the object. If the object has the broken condition, this condition is removed if the object is restored to at least half its original hit points. All of the pieces of an object must be present for this spell to function. Magic items can be repaired by this spell, but you must have a caster level equal to or higher than that of the object. Magic items that are destroyed (at 0 hit points or less) can be repaired with this spell, but this spell does not restore their magic abilities. This spell does not affect creatures (including constructs). This spell has no effect on objects that have been warped or otherwise transmuted, but it can still repair damage done to such items.
If a non-magical object is destroyed, mending can no longer repair it. I had to deliver this bad news to my players who attempted to collect their used arrows and try to mend them back into usefulness.
I agree with mcbobbo; that interpretation of mending is pretty narrow.
I think the rules are just stating that if a magic item is destroyed, mending it will not restore any magical properties that were lost upon destruction. It's not saying that you can mend destroyed magical items, but not mundane ones.
That's an awfully narrow reading. Any explanation as to why it works on destroyed magic items but not destroyed mundane (e.g. masterwork) items?
Dunno. It was specifically reworded that way from how it used to be worded in 3.5e so it's likely intentional.
Make whole gets a huge boost in PFRPG and can restore magical qualities to magic items if you're high enough level. A good rule of thumb would be that damaged or broken is like being hurt or injured to an item and mending is like cure light wounds. Destroyed is like death for an item and make whole is resurrection, at least for magic items. Funny enough, even make whole won't fix a destroyed mundane item although most GMs would rule that it does work.