Y'know, that does become a pretty awesome way to take down T-Rexes...they have, like Int 1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A character who has a strength of 0 is unconscious. However, a character with an effective strength of 0 might not be. And the description for paralyzed does specifically allow mental actions.
I dunno. Differentiation without a difference, I think.
The point behind an "effective" Strength score of 0 isn't to ignore the ramifications of having Strength 0, it's that you DO have the ramifications without the fact. Let me explain that mealy-mouthed sentence.
If your Strength score was "actually" 0, you need something like restoration to correct that. Removal of the condition imposing the Strength score wouldn't repair the damage/drain, because there's documentation on how repair to ability scores are managed.
With an "effective" Strength score of 0, you are impacted by all of the results without the actuality.
Said a different way, your Strength score isn't actually 0, you just pretend it is.
So yeah, unconscious. And understand I want people to be able to fly while paralyzed. This ruling isn't one I like AT ALL. But it is clear.
Also, in my original finding of this, I documented how we've arrived at this state. When you follow the 3.5e to PFRPG evolution of the text, it's pretty obvious what happened. Jason made a change to a root system and missed a dependent system a couple layers down. It's easy to do when working with such a complex referential system as PFRPG.
Even if you don't like that explanation and can't reconcile the contradiction, there still technically isn't one. You can still make Will saves against effects that don't call for willing targets, which would be a purely mental action. (You count as willing when unconscious if a spell demands that, but you're not forced to voluntarily fail a save if the spell does not.) That's just another example of purely mental actions you can still take while unconscious, on top of dreaming.
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die.
Unless otherwise noted, spells and abilities that cause paralysis do not appear to cause unconsciousness. Anything tied to an Attribute functions "as if" that Attribute were 0, but it isn't really. Spells like Hold Person and the Paralyzed Condition itself are very clear that you are aware of your surroundings and can take mental actions.
With a STR of 0, you cannot carry anything of any significant weight. Slings, Blow Gun darts, candles, etc are all fine, but not much else. Since the Fly spell is tied directly to what you can carry and as you cannot carry anything of weight while paralyzed, it would seem you would fall unless you are naked (or have some special effect going that reduces your gear to zero weight).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But it is actually more odd than that. Fly spell lets you hoist only your maximum load PLUS any armour worn! Further, the description says you can not CARRY ALOFT more weight than that... But it says nothing about how much weight you can carry when NOT RISING. So, at the very least, it expressly allows the paralyzed person to fly wearing only an adamantine full plate, so long as they carry nothing more. A case could be made for shields, I suppose. Wearing a pair of gloves instead, though, is right out. Spiked gauntlets and spiked armour still allows you to hurt people if they try to grapple you or something like that!
At some point, RAW does get stupid, doesn't it? The truth is, we aren't doing legalese here. There will always be bad formulations and stupid corner cases.
I would judge this: The fly spell lets you keep flying, carrying just as much as you did before paralysis. The spell can still carry just as much as it could when you cast it. You can direct it through mental actions, though fine maneuvering is out, because you need the fly skill to make maneuvers, i.e. It requires movement. It is consistent, it works, it is predictable, and there is nothing bizarre about its implementation or logic.
Further, the description says you can not CARRY ALOFT more weight than that... But it says nothing about how much weight you can carry when NOT RISING
Aloft in this sense simply means "in the air". Not "UP DIRECTION".
At some point, RAW does get stupid, doesn't it? The truth is, we aren't doing legalese here. There will always be bad formulations and stupid corner cases.
Uhm. The RAW here is that flight isn't possible. I'm not sure why being unable to fly while paralyzed should be called 'stupid'.
The fly skill governs flying, and it is a physical stat (dex) dependant skill. Carrying capacity is a factor in flight and is based on your character’s physical strength. While paralyzed, both dexterity and strength are effectively 0, you simply cannot move. (Fly included)
Sees both consistent and reasonable.
Claiming RAW states this is saying too much.
The subject of a fly spell can charge but not run, and it cannot carry aloft more weight than its maximum load, plus any armor it wears.
As I said, at the very least, by RAW you can fly wearing any sort of armour even while paralyzed. Having a 0 dexterity from paralysis will only be a problem if you had to make a dexterity check. Floating around with the fly effect doesn't force any such checks.
Claiming RAW states this is saying too much.
The subject of a fly spell can charge but not run, and it cannot carry aloft more weight than its maximum load, plus any armor it wears.As I said, at the very least, by RAW you can fly wearing any sort of armour even while paralyzed. Having a 0 dexterity from paralysis will only be a problem if you had to make a dexterity check. Floating around with the fly effect doesn't force any such checks.
You should check out what happens with a 0 Strength or Dexterity score.
^ In my posts, I basically suggest all of the stuff you dismiss:
1. Being paralyzed means you don't breathe. Breathing requires movement, and you can't do that.
2. Being paralyzed means you are immobilized; it says so (or at least heavily implies it) in the PRD, to the point of being almost unambiguously RAW.
3. Being paralyzed means you cannot be moved; it is heavily implied in the PRD, to the point of being almost unambiguously RAW.
4. Being paralyzed means you cannot cause to be moved; this one requires a little straining, but who's to say that "move" is meant in the intransitive sense in the rules? "I can't move" almost always means that you can't move yourself, but there's nothing preventing it from meaning that you are unable to move (other stuff).My justification: a boring and straightforward interpretation of what is admittedly a pretty ambiguous description of the condition which is apparently at odds with what we mean by "paralysis" IRL. Please let me know if you'd like more of the in-depth analysis, but how paralysis interacts with telepathy in general (especially when applied to the self) is interesting and not clearly defined in the rules, as far as I can tell.
Are you saying paralyzation is one of the best things to cast on a friendly who just fell/got knocked off a cliff?
It says you fall unconscious. The paralyzed condition means you can still take mental actions, meaning you are not actually unconscious, though. Someone made an error. What of it?
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die.Unless otherwise noted, spells and abilities that cause paralysis do not appear to cause unconsciousness. Anything tied to an Attribute functions "as if" that Attribute were 0, but it isn't really. Spells like Hold Person and the Paralyzed Condition itself are very clear that you are aware of your surroundings and can take mental actions.
With a STR of 0, you cannot carry anything of any significant weight. Slings, Blow Gun darts, candles, etc are all fine, but not much else. Since the Fly spell is tied directly to what you can carry and as you cannot carry anything of weight while paralyzed, it would seem you would fall unless you are naked (or have some special effect going that reduces your gear to zero weight).
Excellent find. That removes this impediment. Nicely done.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To summarize the findings so far...
1} The Fly skill does NOT have anything to do with flight as long as you stay at or above half your fly speed.
2} Because of #1, your Dexterity being reduced to 0 does NOT impede your flight in any way.
3} Your Strength score being reduced to 0 reduces your ability to carry items to a total weight of nil, PLUS your armor (up to and including heavy armor).
4} Bearing heavy armor reduces your fly speed to 40 while using fly, so flying at 20ft per move action leaves you able to apply #1 and #2.
5} Your Strength score being reduced to 0 does NOT render you unconscious, due to the general ability damage rules.
6} Directing flight via fly does NOT have any ongoing physical movement requirements described.
Sounds like RAW you can fly as you wish when paralyzed, as long as you are utterly naked except for armor, which can weigh as much as 75 pounds in the case of stoneplate. Just don't carry a dagger with you, or you're unable to lift off.
To summarize the findings so far...
1} The Fly skill does NOT have anything to do with flight as long as you stay at or above half your fly speed.
2} Because of #1, your Dexterity being reduced to 0 does NOT impede your flight in any way.
3} Your Strength score being reduced to 0 reduces your ability to carry items to a total weight of nil, PLUS your armor (up to and including heavy armor).
4} Bearing heavy armor reduces your fly speed to 40 while using fly, so flying at 20ft per move action leaves you able to apply #1 and #2.
5} Your Strength score being reduced to 0 does NOT render you unconscious, due to the general ability damage rules.
6} Directing flight via fly does NOT have any ongoing physical movement requirements described.
Sounds like RAW you can fly as you wish when paralyzed, as long as you are utterly naked except for armor, which can weigh as much as 75 pounds in the case of stoneplate. Just don't carry a dagger with you, or you're unable to lift off.
Yes to all of this.
Most cases would result in the paralyzed flyer being unable to continue flying, except if said flyer is nekkid.
Next question...
What happens to those who cannot continue to fly? Drift, float motionless, fall?
No, Remy. You certainly do NOT have to be nekkid to fly while paralyzed. You can fly while carrying up to your maximum carrying capacity, PLUS the weight of whatever armour you're wearing. Stoneplate is fine.
No, Remy. You certainly do NOT have to be nekkid to fly while paralyzed. You can fly while carrying up to your maximum carrying capacity, PLUS the weight of whatever armour you're wearing. Stoneplate is fine.
The problem is that your maximum carrying capacity is zero. So you can carry zero plus your armor. Thus yes, naked, with armor on top.
I continue to prefer the usage of the word "carry" to indicate things you hold in your arms or hands, excluding things physically strapped to you but I recognize there's no solid defense of that reading in RAW. My groups don't play using strict encumbrance rules, so that no doubt colours my views. We just wing it and keep things reasonable. No Str 10 wizards carrying around Large creatures' bodies and the like, but we don't account for every couple pounds worth of gear. Totally house-rule-ville.
IF you can't continue to fly, due to carrying too much, the result is not defined in the rules:
Should the spell duration expire while the subject is still aloft, the magic fails slowly. The subject floats downward 60 feet per round for 1d6 rounds. If it reaches the ground in that amount of time, it lands safely. If not, it falls the rest of the distance, taking 1d6 points of damage per 10 feet of fall. Since dispelling a spell effectively ends it, the subject also descends safely in this way if the fly spell is dispelled, but not if it is negated by an antimagic field.
In any other situation, there isn't anything to say about it.
If you are using wings and you fail a Fly check by 5 or more, you plummet to the ground, taking the appropriate falling damage.
This is a pretty interesting sentence from the retry rules for the Fly skill. First, it specifically means you need to fail Fly checks to fall, so as long as you avoid those, you're happily bobbing along. Second, it specifically calls out WINGED flight for this - apparently only winged fliers need to worry about falling. The section on falling doesn't give any sort of conditions for when you actually fall.
No, Remy. You certainly do NOT have to be nekkid to fly while paralyzed. You can fly while carrying up to your maximum carrying capacity, PLUS the weight of whatever armour you're wearing. Stoneplate is fine.The problem is that your maximum carrying capacity is zero. So you can carry zero plus your armor. Thus yes, naked, with armor on top.
I continue to prefer the usage of the word "carry" to indicate things you hold in your arms or hands, excluding things physically strapped to you but I recognize there's no solid defense of that reading in RAW. My groups don't play using strict encumbrance rules, so that no doubt colours my views. We just wing it and keep things reasonable. No Str 10 wizards carrying around Large creatures' bodies and the like, but we don't account for every couple pounds worth of gear. Totally house-rule-ville.
So long as we're discussing RAW, I see nothing in the rules that clearly state that someone with strength 0 has 0 maximum load. Certainly, the table is an indication of it, but the lowest strength score with a defined maximum load is 1 (10 lbs). The section on having 0 strength simply states that you can't move, not that you can't carry anything. I'd be charitable and say it's undefined, but of course you are free to houserule that strength 0 means a maximum load of 0. So long as you're aware you're houseruling it.
No, Remy. You certainly do NOT have to be nekkid to fly while paralyzed. You can fly while carrying up to your maximum carrying capacity, PLUS the weight of whatever armour you're wearing. Stoneplate is fine.
So... you are agreeing with me? That they cannot be wearing clothes and are thus nekkid?
kk bye
So long as we're discussing RAW, I see nothing in the rules that clearly state that someone with strength 0 has 0 maximum load. Certainly, the table is an indication of it, but the lowest strength score with a defined maximum load is 1 (10 lbs). The section on having 0 strength simply states that you can't move, not that you can't carry anything. I'd be charitable and say it's undefined, but of course you are free to houserule that strength 0 means a maximum load of 0. So long as you're aware you're houseruling it.
I can't say that I understand your argument. If you can't carry anything, you can't carry anything. Your ability to carry things is now reduced to the list of things that are not things. This amount of capacity to carry is not-anything, also known as nothing. No thing. A lack of things. A number of things or amount of things equal to zero. If you attempt to carry anything, you cannot. That'd be a carrying capacity of zero.
Not a houserule. Just... not ignoring the text you quoted. That zero is the next mathematical progression in the table just reinforces what is meant, where "cannot move" remains open to linguistic uncertainty.
You can fly with zero plus your armor. Not a houserule.
No, Remy. You certainly do NOT have to be nekkid to fly while paralyzed. You can fly while carrying up to your maximum carrying capacity, PLUS the weight of whatever armour you're wearing. Stoneplate is fine.So... you are agreeing with me? That they cannot be wearing clothes and are thus nekkid?
kk bye
Uhhhh... No, I was not agreeing with you. I was stating that according from the quote in the Fly spell, it's perfectly clear that you can wear stone plate even with Strength 0 and fly. To be perfectly clear, this was in response to your:
Most cases would result in the paralyzed flyer being unable to continue flying, except if said flyer is nekkid.
In this quote, you very clearly imply that nekkidness would be a requirement for being able to fly with the Fly spell, ignoring the fact that Fly allows you to carry stuff equal to your maximum load PLUS the weight of any armour you are wearing.
Cheers. =)
So long as we're discussing RAW, I see nothing in the rules that clearly state that someone with strength 0 has 0 maximum load. Certainly, the table is an indication of it, but the lowest strength score with a defined maximum load is 1 (10 lbs). The section on having 0 strength simply states that you can't move, not that you can't carry anything. I'd be charitable and say it's undefined, but of course you are free to houserule that strength 0 means a maximum load of 0. So long as you're aware you're houseruling it.I can't say that I understand your argument. If you can't carry anything, you can't carry anything. Your ability to carry things is now reduced to the list of things that are not things. This amount of capacity to carry is not-anything, also known as nothing. No thing. A lack of things. A number of things or amount of things equal to zero. If you attempt to carry anything, you cannot. That'd be a carrying capacity of zero.
Not a houserule. Just... not ignoring the text you quoted. That zero is the next mathematical progression in the table just reinforces what is meant, where "cannot move" remains open to linguistic uncertainty.
You can fly with zero plus your armor. Not a houserule.
Okay, I'll play. Please tell me where it says a strength of 0 means you can't carry anything. I agree it says you can't move, but where does it say you can't carry anything?
No, Remy. You certainly do NOT have to be nekkid to fly while paralyzed. You can fly while carrying up to your maximum carrying capacity, PLUS the weight of whatever armour you're wearing. Stoneplate is fine.So... you are agreeing with me? That they cannot be wearing clothes and are thus nekkid?
kk bye
Uhhhh... No, I was not agreeing with you. I was stating that according from the quote in the Fly spell, it's perfectly clear that you can wear stone plate even with Strength 0 and fly. To be perfectly clear, this was in response to your:
Most cases would result in the paralyzed flyer being unable to continue flying, except if said flyer is nekkid.In this quote, you very clearly imply that nekkidness would be a requirement for being able to fly with the Fly spell, ignoring the fact that Fly allows you to carry stuff equal to your maximum load PLUS the weight of any armour you are wearing.
Cheers. =)
So... you are agreeing with me. Cool...
/backsawayslowly
Okay, I'll play. Please tell me where it says a strength of 0 means you can't carry anything. I agree it says you can't move, but where does it say you can't carry anything?
Are you choosing to be willfully ignorant? Whether you can fly or not while paralyzed has been pretty well settled at this point. Some misc reminders of things from the rules:
Strength also sets the maximum amount of weight your character can carry.
Your Strength score determines your characters carrying capacity.
These carrying capacity rules determine how much a character's equipment slows him down.
A character's maximum load is the highest amount of weight listed for a character's Strength in the heavy load column of Table: Carrying Capacity.
STR Max Load
0 ?
1 10
2 20
3 30
4 40
5 50
6 60
7 70
8 80
9 90
The subject of a fly spell can charge but not run, and it cannot carry aloft more weight than its maximum load, plus any armor it wears.
Fly (Dex; Armor Check Penalty)
Without making a check, a flying creature can remain flying at the end of its turn so long as it moves a distance greater than half its speed.
Encumbrance Effects
Heavy
Check Penalty -6
A character with a Strength score of 0 is too weak to move in any way. A character with a Dexterity score of 0 is incapable of moving and is effectively immobile.
Okay, I'll play. Please tell me where it says a strength of 0 means you can't carry anything. I agree it says you can't move, but where does it say you can't carry anything?So long as we're discussing RAW, I see nothing in the rules that clearly state that someone with strength 0 has 0 maximum load. Certainly, the table is an indication of it, but the lowest strength score with a defined maximum load is 1 (10 lbs). The section on having 0 strength simply states that you can't move, not that you can't carry anything. I'd be charitable and say it's undefined, but of course you are free to houserule that strength 0 means a maximum load of 0. So long as you're aware you're houseruling it.I can't say that I understand your argument. If you can't carry anything, you can't carry anything. Your ability to carry things is now reduced to the list of things that are not things. This amount of capacity to carry is not-anything, also known as nothing. No thing. A lack of things. A number of things or amount of things equal to zero. If you attempt to carry anything, you cannot. That'd be a carrying capacity of zero.
Not a houserule. Just... not ignoring the text you quoted. That zero is the next mathematical progression in the table just reinforces what is meant, where "cannot move" remains open to linguistic uncertainty.
You can fly with zero plus your armor. Not a houserule.
Sorry, this is 100% my fault, but an honest mistake. My eyes simply misread the bolded word above as "and", not "not". Man, my reply to you looks so strange recognizing that failure.
Anguish: Thank you.
Remy: As I said, you are free to houserule it. As you yourself point out, 0 strength means a ? carrying capacity by RAW. So, again by RAW, there is nothing that even says you HAVE a maximum carrying capacity with strength 0. Not defined. Make a call, but it WILL be a houserule. :)
|
Anguish: Thank you.
Remy: As I said, you are free to houserule it. As you yourself point out, 0 strength means a ? carrying capacity by RAW. So, again by RAW, there is nothing that even says you HAVE a maximum carrying capacity with strength 0. Not defined. Make a call, but it WILL be a houserule. :)
By that logic, characters with the dead condition can get up and take normal actions. We don't need the rules to tell us that the carrying capacity of STR 0 is 0.
You're correct. Fortunately, being dead is an obvious impediment to taking actions.
Suddenly being paralyzed does not necessarily mean that the magical field that's letting you fly becomes weaker and unable to support weight. If, indeed, it is a magical field. I'd argue that the weight restriction of fly should either A. Not exist or B. be based entirely on what your weight limit was when the spell was cast on you.
This entire topic's gone on for 176 (now 177!) posts too long. The first guy to reply summed it up accurately. Is flying with the fly spell a purely mental action? If yes, you can do it while paralyzed. If no, you cannot.
He's frozen? When did the cold descriptor get added to all the paralyzing spells?
Plus, I think it more means, his friends cannot "manipulate" his limbs.
I'm pretty sure he doesn't instantly weigh 5000 tons.
Also, just to open up a whole other can of worms. What if you had Silent Telekinesis memorized. Could you move yourself with that? It's a purely mental action.
You move objects or creatures by concentrating on them. Depending on the version selected, the spell can provide a gentle, sustained force, perform a variety of combat maneuvers, or exert a single short, violent thrust.
As long as you do not exceed the weight limit based on CL, then you could cast a Stilled and Silent Telekinesis to move yourself.
Curious. My search ability isn't working today.
Do you get a Reflex Save while Paralyzed? :P
By that logic, characters with the dead condition can get up and take normal actions. We don't need the rules to tell us that the carrying capacity of STR 0 is 0.Anguish: Thank you.
Remy: As I said, you are free to houserule it. As you yourself point out, 0 strength means a ? carrying capacity by RAW. So, again by RAW, there is nothing that even says you HAVE a maximum carrying capacity with strength 0. Not defined. Make a call, but it WILL be a houserule. :)
Exactly. Thank you for understanding my point here. RAW is pretty much a useless concept, because the system is too complex. There will always be undefined and contradictory parts. So, when someone tries claiming a paralyzed person isn't going to fall, because it says he is immovable, that's useless.
Treat the discussion sensibly, and we can get results worth having.
Curious. My search ability isn't working today.
Do you get a Reflex Save while Paralyzed? :P
Yep.
RAW is pretty much a useless concept, because the system is too complex. There will always be undefined and contradictory parts. So, when someone tries claiming a paralyzed person isn't going to fall, because it says he is immovable, that's useless.
Treat the discussion sensibly, and we can get results worth having.
You're in the Rules Questions forums. A place where we use RAW. If there is no RAW, or it is unclear, you hit the FAQ button next to the relevant post. Otherwise, you discuss the RAW. RAI is an aside.
If you feel RAW is a useless concept, this probably isn't a great place for you.
RAW taken to the extreme that literally no interpretation is allowed can't help but be useless.
Suddenly being paralyzed does not necessarily mean that the magical field that's letting you fly becomes weaker and unable to support weight. If, indeed, it is a magical field. I'd argue that the weight restriction of fly should either A. Not exist or B. be based entirely on what your weight limit was when the spell was cast on you.
This entire topic's gone on for 176 (now 177!) posts too long. The first guy to reply summed it up accurately. Is flying with the fly spell a purely mental action? If yes, you can do it while paralyzed. If no, you cannot.
Sums it up pretty well, I think. And the counter is now 184. The reason for this? Someone dug up that you can't move if your strength goes to 0 - which means RAW isn't going to help getting this decided. Another reason is that many here conveniently ignore RAW they do not like to be reminded of that would work against their case, and yet another is that people are too sloppy when looking through the quotes.
If you truly do want to claim that only RAW is useful, then please explain how you would then handle that the carrying capacity table has no maximum load listed for strength 0.
Simple.
Carrying capacity affects how easily you can move.
Strength 0 means you cannot move.
Carrying capacity becomes moot at that point.
If there's a situation where you can move with strength 0, then your carrying capacity should not figure into it, as it's not at all related to your own strength.
A character with a Strength score of 0 is too weak to move in any way. A character with a Dexterity score of 0 is incapable of moving and is effectively immobile.
The RAW is clear, whether you like it or not.
The RAI is clear, whether you like it or not.
Fly isn't telekinesis. You want it to be, okay... home rule it.
... here we go again.
Correct a character with a 0 strength cannot move. However a spell that moves the character can still move him. His physical strength isn't moving him, the spell is.
If you want to argue that the fly spell uses the recipients of the fly spells STR score, then he would fall. He can still make a DC 10 check to not take damage from the fall.
I'm glad you mentioned this. I mean, you're wrong, but the exact way you phrased it was perfect.
The spell isn't moving him. If the spell was doing the moving, then a Str 0 wouldn't matter.
But the spell isn't the one who needs to do the moving.
The spell recipient is the one moving. And the spell recipient is incapable of moving. So he cannot continue to fly when paralyzed.
The subject can fly at a speed of 60 feet
The subject is granted a form of movement by this spell. Being paralyzed halts all movement.
If this was telekinesis, then he could continue flinging himself around, as it would be the telekinesis spell which is the active motive force. But with Fly, it grants the active motive force to the recipient, so that he may move. Paralyzed prevents him from moving, though…
I believe this thread reached an impasse back on the first page; how about we all just FAQ it and move on with our lives?
|
|
I believe this thread reached an impasse back on the first page; how about we all just FAQ it and move on with our lives?
I don't think it reached an impasse until the Str 0 info, and to an extent, the Dex 0 info was brought in. I looked for them before my initial response because I knew there were some changes from 3.5 and I don't take a lot for granted given all the many small changes. I think the situation is no longer clear; this is a change from my early perspective on this.
I hit the FAQ and encourage it. We have rules that are in some degree of conflict and it gets down to a judgement call and a matter of playstyle, to a lesser extent.
Being paralyzed halts all physical movement. Not abilities or effects that can move you via mental actions.
The spell isn't moving him.
Then why, pray tell, does having the spell active on him allow him to fly, without any granting of wings or other physical attributes that, were they present, would allow him to fly on his own? If the spell said it granted him wings, sure. If it even *hinted* at that.
But it doesn't. It even says what happens when the spell ends - which isn't you plumetting out of the sky, it's you magically falling (softly) downward for a number of rounds. And then plumetting when that effect of the spell goes away.
Where does it say that a paralyzed or helpless creature has an effective strength of 0? I can only find the part about dexterity.
Where does it say that a paralyzed or helpless creature has an effective strength of 0? I can only find the part about dexterity.
Never mind. Found out I was looking at a 4th printing Corebook. Carry on.
Where is this strength 0 business coming from? You are immobile, not weakened. I see no mention of Strength adjustments anywhere under the paralysis condition.
A giant lifting a boulder over his head at the moment of his paralysis isn't suddenly crushed by the boulder.
Also, for what it's worth, I absolutely believe that flying is a purely mental action, and that a flying paralyzed creature can still fly (provided the flight is magical in nature).
Your Dexterity penalty to the fly skill would represent you not being able to turn your head to see where you're going and other factors that might otherwise speed up reaction time. This is partially made up by the bonus the fly spell gives you in the first place, so you may well be able to hover anyways.
Believing that it was the game developers' intent for paralysis to turn people into immobile objects is absurd. "Rooted to the spot" is regarding the person's inability to move under his own power, nothing else; and "unable to move his limbs" has absolutely no bearing on someone being able to move the rest of his body from the space. It would be akin to moving a heavy mannequin that has no joints.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ah, I see. I was looking at PARALYSIS in the Glossary, not the PARALYZED condition under the Condition section.
Chock it up to confusion caused by Paizo insisting that they scatter their rules everywhere.