| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Got into an interesting "Conversation" with another player today. The character I was playing had a Fly speed of 50, and the other character had a run speed of 40.
He claimed he could outrun me and that I could never catch him, assuming I could only fly at 30, when I pointed out otherwise he in turn pointed out that Flying has NO run action, and thus he could sprint faster than I could fly.
I didn't know anything about this, and it seemed odd to me (Why couldn't a flier increase their own effort and fly faster much like a runner could?), but as he knows much more about pathfinder than I do (Or the GM in fact), we went with his interpretation.
Having had time to look some information up, I've seen nothing in any books about this, and only this (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2m3u2?Running-in-flight) here.
Can anyone please point to actual book references I can use? :)
Especially since that player is the GM for another campaign I'm in, and I'd need a solid book reference before I could talk to him about it.
Thank you for reading :)
You know, this hadn't occurred to me before, but I have no idea. Also, if there's a difference between those with magical flight speeds, or natural. I could really use an answer to this, since I just got a hold of flight in a dungeon crawl my DM is using to exterminate my party.
There is nothing to restrict flying creatures from using the run action.
For contrast, the climb rules specifically exclude climbing creatures from using the run action.
Additionally, both the Fly spell and the spell Gaseous Form excludes creatures from using the run action.
However, the swim rules specifically includes using the run action while swimming.
Unfortunately, with nothing for or against performing a Flying run action it is up to the GM to decide. But, if it matters, below is what 3.5 had to say on this.
A creature can use the run action while flying, provided it flies in a straight line.
There is nothing to restrict flying creatures from using the run action... the climb rules specifically exclude climbing creatures from using the run action... the Fly spell and the spell Gaseous Form excludes creatures from using the run action... the swim rules specifically includes using the run action while swimming.
Unfortunately, with nothing for or against performing a Flying run action it is up to the GM to decide. But, if it matters, below is what 3.5 had to say on this.
A creature can use the run action while flying, provided it flies in a straight line.
It might fly (No pun intended), he's been pretty strict Lately about using ONLY Paizo or pathfinder books (He's getting pretty close to banning me from using SRD or anything else for any reason). Hopefully the first argument (That since it specifically says you CAN'T under certain circumstances, and thus should be able to under any other circumstance) works.
The fact that pathfinder is specifically "Backwards compatible" and the previous run/flight rule being grandfathered in from 3.5 is unlikely to work in my circumstances. :(
BUT! Hopefully it will for anyone else, So I hope this helps other people.
This question has been answered (As long as someone doesn't pop up with anything new), and thanks all. :)
|
The problem is that the rule doesn't exist in Pathfinder to say one way or the other what the intention is. I'm not sure that the wording on the Run action counts (it seems a bit pedantic - the commonsense rule applies), but the wording from the 3.5 MM is specific about intent.
Unless he has a better reason to change it, this is almost certainly the case with Pathfinder as well.
Teatime42:
How does he define various things then? Many things in Pathfinder do not have definitions or clear indications of how to run them UNLESS you use 3.5 information. Pathfinder was thrown together rather quickly and does not stand without a grounding in 3.5 era logic.
thenobledrake,
Really? How do you define "energy" or "energy damage"? Find me a definition anywhere in the CRB that defines it.
There have been threads about that and the only way people can define it is by going to the 3.5 rules because they simply are not defined in the CRB.
Note: the debate is about Positive and Negative Energy and do they qualify as "energy". The answer is no but there is nothing in the CRB to indicate this. Anyone coming to the game without 3.5 experience will not know that.
Here is the 3.5 wording that excluded Positive and Negative energy:
energy damage: Damage caused by one of five types of energy (not counting positive and negative energy): acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic.
There is nothing in the CRB coming even close to that.
How about "Enemy"? People periodically ask what defines an enemy? Looking in the CRB there is no definition for what defines an "enemy". However, 3.5 rules has a definition.
enemy: A creature unfriendly to you.
The debate here is can you treat an ally as an enemy just because you want to to do something which can normally only be done against enemies (such as an Attack of Opportunity).
"When you run, you can move up to four times your speed in a straight line (or three times your speed if you're in heavy armor)."
Since the run action does not specify "speed" as being only specific types of speed (swim, climb, fly, burrow, etc.) it is referring to all speeds in general - meaning that any type of speed not compatible with the run action would have to specifically say so.
I think the main problem is that when you "Run" IRL, you're running. You can't physically run while flying (Falling with style excluded), or swimming (Shaman's and Jesus excluded), climbing (Spider-man excluded) or burrowing (... what...). "Run" is an action that brings the connotation of physically running. If they had named it something else like "Hustling", it'd be easy to argue. But everyone KNOWS that you can only run while using your legs, only silly people think otherwise. It's just bad nomenclature (Or imagination on the part of the users) :/
The problem is that the rule doesn't exist in Pathfinder to say one way or the other what the intention is. I'm not sure that the wording on the Run action counts (it seems a bit pedantic - the commonsense rule applies), but the wording from the 3.5 MM is specific about intent.
Unless he has a better reason to change it, this is almost certainly the case with Pathfinder as well.
It seems pretty clear to me, that the "Run" action is supposed to apply to all (unless stated otherwise) modes of movement, perhaps even assumed to be applied. But it doesn't specifically say, which is my problem.
How does he define various things then? Many things in Pathfinder do not have definitions or clear indications of how to run them UNLESS you use 3.5 information. Pathfinder was thrown together rather quickly and does not stand without a grounding in 3.5 era logic.
Hm, now THERE is an idea, coupled with that "Energy damage" you mention later, I might be able to use that. He agrees that Pathfinder is backwards compatible (The creators said so after all! XD), the problem is that we've got an outspoken GM friend, and he's made my GM friend very defensive about his knowledge (I don't think he's even noticed). That's why I want a solid argument before I go to him. He's a very reasonable guy (Normally), but if I don't bring enough, he might just shut it out out of frustration and fatigue.
This way I can present the information, and there IS NO argument. Just acceptance either way. The guy gets enough arguments and disagreements, I don't want to add any.
Especially since I'm a fairly argumentative person :(
That is entirely untrue - Pathfinder stands just fine without any reference to 3.5.
Matter of fact is that I never reference 3.5 when trying to figure out how the rules work, and never run into a case of not being able to find an answer that works.
From what I understand, 95% of the time (Or so), this is true. This is unfortunately one of that remaining 5%. It's very hard to catch each and every thing in just about anything in general. This is why erratas are issued, laws changed, books edited, bugs fixed etc.
Sometimes you just forget something, other times something just doesn't work.
Really? How do you define "energy damage"? Find me a definition anywhere in the CRB that defines it.
There have been threads about that and the only way people can define it is by going to the 3.5 rules.
Makes me think that the people who wrote the books kinda assumed that you would have a working knowledge of 3.5. Sorta a system built for those who had been using it, and wanted to see it fixed/improved.
Apparently the topic isn't as closed as I thought XD
Making some notes, and thanks all (again) for helping :)
I allow the Run action to be taken by any flying character who has a natural flight ability, since the Fly spell disallows it.
Folks, we have a thread on the subject of 3.5's influence on rules interpretation already.
On the subject of running, so far as I can see, you can use the run action with any movement mode if the source of that mode doesn't specifically exclude it. This is because the run action doesn't specify land speed. It could easily have done so, but it didn't; I have to think this was intentional, as it wasn't some arcane rules interaction that the designers couldn't expect to come up often.
thenobledrake,
So, you refute my statement that Pathfinder does not have definitions or clear indications and then state that you have to hunt for the answer by combining information and that 3.5 was clearer? Thank you for proving my statement.
BTW, please show me where in the text on CRB p562-563 Energy Resistance states it does not include Positive or Negative Energy or that it is only used against Acid, Cold, Electricity, Fire, or Sonic damage.
So basically nobledrake you won't do it because you can't do it, and this is not about theorycraft. Don't move the goalpost. He is asking you to show the rules in pathfinder the show negative and positive energy are not the ones spoken of when "energy damage" mentioned. The reason why you would respond to it, is to prove that PF covers everything 3.5 covered since that was your claim.
Either you are right or you are wrong. If you are correct then finding the quotes to back your argument should be easy.
PS: Many times the FAQ has to clarify things that are not in the rules because text was cut from 3.5. As an example how empower metamagic worked had to be defined by Jason, so that is one example of a rule being unclear from the rules alone, and if it matters he made one ruling, then changed it to the 3.5 version later.
Yes, there have been a number of threads regarding Positive and Negative Energy and how they interact with the phrase "energy damage".
Example: Energy Absorption (CRB p80). Nothing here to limit it to Resist Energy type energy. So would Positive and Negative Energy apply? Not if you look up the definition in the 3.5 rules.
While I have 30 years of D&D experience I play with people who were introduced to gaming with Pathfinder. There are a number of times where they cannot find out WHY the rules are a certain way or even if they are that way. So, when people post similar questions on the boards I understand them.
You clearly have some level of system mastery so you can "look at the Pathfinder rules more thoroughly". But not everyone has that and not everyone is able to research the books for 3 hours to find each individual reference that adds or subtracts from the point in order to build a cohesive picture.
In the OP's case his GM is trying to GM Pathfinder RAW. Unfortunately, to use your own phrase, "that way lies madness" because the Devs simply did not write the rules that way. They have stated a number of times they expect the GM to use their head rather than GMing it completely as written.
In any case, as Blahpers stated, we are off topic. The point regarding running while flying was made earlier. :)
|
Already posted by others, but to get it all in one spost:
1) run action:
Run
You can run as a full-round action. If you do, you do not also get a 5-foot step. When you run, you can move up to four times your speed in a straight line (or three times your speed if you're in heavy armor). You lose any Dexterity bonus to AC unless you have the Run feat.
Your speed, not your land speed.
2) Speed definition (Bestiary):
Speed: The creature's land speed, and additional speeds as necessary for the creature.
So a creature can have several speeds.
and, from teh CRB
Speed
Your speed tells you how far you can move in a round and still do something, such as attack or cast a spell. Your speed depends mostly on your size and your armor.
...
If you use two move actions in a round (sometimes called a “double move” action), you can move up to double your speed. If you spend the entire round running, you can move up to quadruple your speed (or triple if you are in heavy armor).
This is so-so as it speak only of races with a land speed, but it allow you to run with all the speeds you have.
3) Climb skill
A creature with a climb speed has a +8 racial bonus on all Climb checks. The creature must make a Climb check to climb any wall or slope with a DC higher than 0, but it can always choose to take 10, even if rushed or threatened while climbing. If a creature with a climb speed chooses an accelerated climb (see above), it moves at double its climb speed (or at its land speed, whichever is slower) and makes a single Climb check at a –5 penalty. Such a creature retains its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) while climbing, and opponents get no special bonus to their attacks against it. It cannot, however, use the run action while climbing.
A specific rule that say that you can't run when climbing, even if you have a climb speed. If running was disallowed for every not land form of movement why specifying that only for climbing?
4) Swin:
Such a creature can use the run action while swimming, provided that it swims in a straight line.
You can swim and run.
5) Fly
The fly skill don't say anything pro or against running, probably because we have both mundane and natural ways of flying.
The fly spell say:
The subject of a fly spell can charge but not run,
and charge
Charge
Charging is a special full-round action that allows you to move up to twice your speed and attack during the action
so you can take a double move while flying.
While nothing of the above is absolute proof, I would say that if you have a natural form of lying (i.e. you use wings or other muscle powered form of flight) you can run. Spells and effects that give you a fly speed with a magical propulsion (the Fly spell, essentially) allow you to take a double move, but don't allow you to run.
- * -
BTW, it depend on the terrain and how long the fly effect will last, but as a character can run only in a straight line on open terrain and he will tire pretty fast it is very difficult for the character running on the ground to distance a double moving flying character.
x4 run at 120' round in a straight line for 20 rounds or so = 2.400'
x2 fly at 100' for the same stretch of time = 2.000'
as this is a featureless plain (as he is running) he is still in plain sight.
10 round walking for the land based guy to get his wind back, move 30' = 300'
x2 fly at 100' for the lying character = 1.000'
Now the land based guy has moved 2.700' and the flying guy 3.000'
Hustling and running in Overland movement:
Overland Movement
Characters covering long distances cross-country use overland movement. Overland movement is measured in miles per hour or miles per day. A day represents 8 hours of actual travel time. For rowed watercraft, a day represents 10 hours of rowing. For a sailing ship, it represents 24 hours.
Walk: A character can walk 8 hours in a day of travel without a problem. Walking for longer than that can wear him out (see Forced March, below).
Hustle: A character can hustle for 1 hour without a problem. Hustling for a second hour in between sleep cycles deals 1 point of nonlethal damage, and each additional hour deals twice the damage taken during the previous hour of hustling. A character who takes any nonlethal damage from hustling becomes fatigued.
A fatigued character can't run or charge and takes a penalty of –2 to Strength and Dexterity. Eliminating the nonlethal damage also eliminates the fatigue.
Run: A character can't run for an extended period of time. Attempts to run and rest in cycles effectively work out to a hustle.
I think the main problem is that when you "Run" IRL, you're running.It has been my experience that the biggest cause of confusion when attempting to interpret rules is knowing when a game rule is providing you a "game term" definition to a word...
That is a VERY good point, and one I will keep in mind when I bring this up next time I talk to him.
On the subject of running, so far as I can see, you can use the run action with any movement mode if the source of that mode doesn't specifically exclude it. This is because the run action doesn't specify land speed. It could easily have done so, but it didn't; I have to think this was intentional, as it wasn't some arcane rules interaction that the designers couldn't expect to come up often.
That summarizes very nicely, thank you. :)
Burrowing while "Running" makes my brain hurt though XD
Already posted by others, but to get it all in one post:
1) run action:
Run: You can run as a full-round action. If you do, you do not also get a 5-foot step. When you run, you can move up to four times your speed in a straight line (or three times your speed if you're in heavy armor). You lose any Dexterity bonus to AC unless you have the Run feat.Your speed, not your land speed.
2) Speed definition (Bestiary):
Speed: The creature's land speed, and additional speeds as necessary for the creature.So a creature can have several speeds.
And, from the CRB
Speed: Your speed tells you how far you can move in a round and still do something, such as attack or cast a spell. Your speed depends mostly on your size and your armor... If you use two move actions in a round (sometimes called a “double move” action), you can move up to double your speed. If you spend the entire round running, you can move up to quadruple your speed (or triple if you are in heavy armor).This is so-so as it speak only of races with a land speed, but it allow you to run with all the speeds you have.
3) Climb skill
A creature with a climb speed has a +8 racial bonus on all Climb checks. The creature must make a Climb check to climb any wall or slope with a DC higher than 0, but it can always choose to take 10, even if rushed or threatened while climbing. If a creature with a climb speed chooses an accelerated climb (see above), it moves at double its climb speed (or at its land speed, whichever is slower) and makes a single Climb check at a –5 penalty. Such a creature retains its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) while climbing, and opponents get no special bonus to their attacks against it. It cannot, however, use the run action while climbing.A specific rule that say that you can't run when climbing, even if you have a climb speed. If running was disallowed for every not land form of movement...
And I think that last bit covers it, and there wasn't a single dissenting view, pretty unanimous.
You guys have thoroughly analyzed this, so much in fact the only thing that could make the point better than you did is if someone finds something like this:
Flight: BLAH BLAH BLAH, you, you can use the run action.
Don't think that's happening anytime soon. :P
Thanks again all.
I think this time it is well and truly answered. :)
thenobledrake,
Certain people are only applying clear RAW rather than cobbled together RAW or reasonable RAI. There are any number of questions on these boards that simply cannot be answered using only RAW because so many of the rules are incomplete compared to their 3.5 counterparts.
Via the books Pathfinder RAW has no definition for energy damage. 3.5 RAW there was such a definition. There may be a way to cobble together such a definition by reading the rules and deciphering intent, but that is not RAW, it is RAI.
My point (the one you initially contested) was to indicate to the OP that there is not always a RAW answer for everything in Pathfinder and when there isn't you can look back to 3.5 for the RAW answer for that edition and then use that to help formulate your ruling. After all, Pathfinder is supposed to be 'backwards compatible' isn't it?
One note: I did not state that it required referencing 3.5 materials. I said it required referencing 3.5 era logic. There is a very significant difference. Many of us playing Pathfinder today still use 3.5 era understanding that is then modified by what we learn from Pathfinder. How often do you people realize that some little rule in Pathfinder was different from 3.5?
So, if you played 3.5 or learned from people who had you have 3.5 era logic infecting your thought processes. Now, separate that logic from Pathfinder. It is hard to do.
People I game with, the people who never played 3.5 show me all the time that Pathfinder is incomplete. Things I thought were clear are not unless you have a grounding in 3.5.