Does PFS negate wands from being drawn while moving?


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 160 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wasn't this simply solved by walking over to wounded ally and making a heal check, stopping the bleeding is all the is required to prevent the PC from dying.
The following round, the aiding PC could as a move action, draw the wand or scroll, and as a standard action, use the wand to perform the heal.

The DM ruled no one was close enough to travel and heal.

this isn't the DM fault.

1) did this character get wounded and knock down the round immediately before dying? (unlikely) so no one rendered aid previously.
2) there was a druid with no heal spell ready (poor planning and over dependence on CLW trinkets… very typical of PFS)
3) no one in the party has any points put into heal? Seriously? (riiiight because of the per dependence on CLW trinkets)

THIS is precisely WHY the rule to limit drawing, moving and using the wand exists… OTHERWISE this method would be incredibly over used, and no one would take ranks in heal or keep a prepared heal spell because ALL the theory crafters about in combat healing would be wrong.

In this case, adhering to that theory got this character killed.

This would allow ALL parties to just wobble about with pods of 50 charges in CLWs and never have to worry about other methods of healing, EVER.

Which is why you can't move, draw and use, in a single round.

You live and learn….

Don't depend too heavily on CLW wands from now on.

Combat healing Is useful.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pendagast wrote:

THIS is precisely WHY the rule to limit drawing, moving and using the wand exists… OTHERWISE this method would be incredibly over used, and no one would take ranks in heal or keep a prepared heal spell because ALL the theory crafters about in combat healing would be wrong.

In this case, adhering to that theory got this character killed.

This would allow ALL parties to just wobble about with pods of 50 charges in CLWs and never have to worry about other methods of healing, EVER.

Which is why you can't move, draw and use, in a single round.

I highly doubt the rules were specifically written to prevent characters from using CLW in combat or to prevent characters from walking around bristling with wands. The rules were written with the expectation that GMs would limit certain magic items in their games if they didn't want characters to rely on them.

Several people have already made good arguments that the rules do say that you can draw a wand on the run. The spring-loaded wrist sheath explicitly lets you draw a wand as a swift action, so clearly the developers did not plan to prevent characters from moving, drawing, and using a wand in a single round.

And there is one very simple reason why CLW make a better in-combat healing option than a druid preparing a 1st level cure spell or ranks in heal:

Wands don't provoke.

Suppose the druid did have a cure light spell prepped, or suppose someone had a +10 bonus on heal. They run over and try to heal the character...and take attacks of opportunity from the person who just dropped the dying character. The druid loses the spell, the person trying to heal can get knocked unconscious (there's nothing about taking the damage as a penalty on a skill check, but I can see GMs ruling that way)...and the character can still die anyway.

Using the CLW--even with Use Magic Device--does not provoke, the spell goes off, and the character stays alive.

Relying on CLW =/= not believing in in-combat healing. Sometimes the wand is just the best option, especially in a situation where you don't get to plan out your characters in advance.


Ok Gwen,
but what does that have to do with the fact there are specific ways to draw items as swift actions and many things are being moved back to move actions rather than swift action such as weapons on weapon cords.

The rules specifically say you can draw a wand as a free action as part of a move action only when it's easily accessible.

You're right that the wand is more efficient but that still doesn't have a rules basis for why you can retrieve an object (move action), move to the guy (move action), cast the spell (standard action).

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
Aikidoka wrote:
The rules specifically say you can draw a wand as a free action as part of a move action only when it's easily accessible.

I don't think you've been following this thread very closely.

This is exactly what's being debated.

Shadow Lodge

Not really being debated. Also, not sure changing the way that a single 1cp item works, in PFS only, counts as "many things being moved back to Move Actions".

Different people different ideas on what "easily accessible" or how many items can be easily accessible at a given time. Outside of the can you reasonably be assumed to be sleeping in armor thing, it looks like just about everyone kind of agrees.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Stabilize is a ranged spell with a fair range, at level 2+ a druid has 4 orisons.
Even in a all human party totally lacking other spellcasters:
- light
- detect magic
and the basis are covered.

Then you can take stabilize and another cantrip.


I DO believe the action economy rules were SPECIFICALLY written with preventing certain actions in mind. USe of magic items like scrolls, portions, wands and spell trigger items specifically where definitely considered.

IF the developers believed you should be able to draw the wand, move and use the wand in one round, they wouldn't have written up/included a wrist spring item that modifies those rules, because said ability would already exist, eliminating the need for the item to even be written about.


not only that, the original ruling from the Dm was stated as "no one was within 15 feet of the downed PC" so ummm why was that PC so far away to begin with?


Nefreet wrote:
Aikidoka wrote:
The rules specifically say you can draw a wand as a free action as part of a move action only when it's easily accessible.

I don't think you've been following this thread very closely.

This is exactly what's being debated.

Sorry I have reading comprehension as a class skill, I wasn't going to entreat the idea that words on the page were meaningless.

I think Devil is right, it's what people say is easily accessible that is up for grabs. I don't see a free action being applicable to a lot of things for drawing for mechanical and thematic reasons and that's where the debate is.

It's why you usually cannot move, draw a potion and then drink it in a single turn.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pendagast wrote:
I DO believe the action economy rules were SPECIFICALLY written with preventing certain actions in mind. USe of magic items like scrolls, portions, wands and spell trigger items specifically where definitely considered.

I don't believe you were there.

Quote:
IF the developers believed you should be able to draw the wand, move and use the wand in one round, they wouldn't have written up/included a wrist spring item that modifies those rules, because said ability would already exist, eliminating the need for the item to even be written about.

If they believed you shouldn't be able to move, draw and activate the wand, they wouldn't have mentioned wands under the heading of the action that gets to be paired with a normal move.

As for the SLWS, your belief that the only thing it does is allow draw+move+use is staggeringly wrong. It allows draw+activate in a surprise round (I had a diviner who did that a lot) or while staggered. It allows draw+activate when you need to use your move action for something other than a normal move (like standing from prone, putting another item away, putting that same wand away after activation, swimming to shore, climbing up onto something, opening a door, moving a heavy object...). It also allows draw+activate when the spell in the wand takes longer than a standard action.

Maybe the sheath was written to allow all those things, and not just to allow move+draw+activate. And that's to say nothing of all the other items besides wands that the sheath can work with.

"There's this cheap item that allows this long list of possibilities with a bunch of different items, but I totally know that it was actually written specifically for this one specific circumstance with one specific type of item, which in turn totally proves there's no other way to do that; and besides, I know what the designers were thinking when the rules were written!"

That's you right now. Don't be surprised when nobody takes you seriously.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The action economy is part of the game. It is also something that some don't find important and instead prefer to focus on the story telling portion of the game. But from a rules perspective, it is there and vital. It's portant to understand what actions are required or else the characters get, effectively, extra actions. Extra actions are the root of any builds that are viewed as being on the higher tiers of play. Understand them or they get out of control.

There is a difference between rules and procedures. Creatures must have objects in hand to use them in most cases. This is a rule. What a character has in hand by default is a matter of procedure. For example, I ask players to decide what's in hand. That's my procedure no trust my players to act like adults playing a game (even the teens) until they prove me wrong. I assume that characters are always armed in dangerous county, such as a dungeon, approaching a ruin, in game world environment, walking down the road outside of town. I don't see that as being the case in a settlement.

Where an item is in inventory determines the action needed to draw it. That is a rule. Wands are weapon like in almost all situations. However you want to justify it is up to you, but the distinction exists between items that are carried as accessible and those that are packed away or stowed. Likewise with potions. How many can be readily carried at a time is a matter of procedure and style until an item surfaces in your game that states a limit . For on GM, that's one potion and one want. For another it is all owned. For a third, it is up to 3, 5, or 10 each.

Distinguish between rule and procedure. Procedure is a matter of style, not rule.


If the SLWS was so important to action economy then why wasn't it in the core book? Not only that, its not even in a hardback, but the adventurer's armory. If anything, I think that the person who wrote the SLWS thought that wands could be drawn combined with a move action, and wrote the wrist sheath to allow for a sleight of hand bonus to conceal a wand and draw it as a move action (instead of the normal standard action to draw a concealed item). The SLWS expands on that by changing the draw to a swift action, which can be preferential to a move in many circumstances.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Spoiler:
As I'm sure you've guessed, he randomly attacks my wife with a full round attack doing 29 damage at once which would be more than sufficient to outright knockout any lvl 2 character or outright kill any lvl 2 character that has a low hit die, let alone one with a low hit die and 3 health left. Needless to say she died.

I see an issue right there.

Full attacks, especially against an injured target, should be handled one attack at a time. Once the original target goes down, especially form the description in this game, the attacker would move on to a new target, especially since it didn't need to even take a 5' step to switch targets.

Claw, claw, bite?

Claw, target goes down, move on to next target with he second claw. No need to add insult to injury. Unless it was some sort of zombie ogre, and even then, it would have switched targets after the first one went down.

And, yes, I am of the school who thinks you can draw a wand on the move. Otherwise you get into all sorts of issues, even with the first part of the rules, when you start getting into defining when is a wand a weapon-like object, and when isn't it?

Wand of Magic Missile? Always weapon-like.

Wand of Cure/Inflict Light Wounds? Situationally an offensive spell, so sometimes weapon-like?

Wand of Feather Step? Not an offensive spell, unless you consider using it on a charge build to be offensive, so never a weapon-like object?

Seriously, setting up wands as always weapon-like, as the first part does, means that, unless explicitly excluded, like in Quick Draw, it is treated as a weapon for usage. Also note that Quick Drawe explicitly excludes wands from being a target of Quick Draw. Drawing on the move does not.


kinevon wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

I see an issue right there.

Full attacks, especially against an injured target, should be handled one attack at a time. Once the original target goes down, especially form the description in this game, the attacker would move on to a new target, especially since it didn't need to even take a 5' step to switch targets.

Claw, claw, bite?

Claw, target goes down, move on to next target with he second claw. No need to add insult to injury. Unless it was some sort of zombie ogre, and even then, it would have switched targets after the first one went down.

And, yes, I am of the school who thinks you can draw a wand on the move. Otherwise you get into all sorts of issues, even with the first part of the rules, when you start getting into defining when is a wand a weapon-like object, and when isn't it?

Wand of Magic Missile? Always weapon-like.

Wand of Cure/Inflict Light Wounds? Situationally an offensive spell, so sometimes weapon-like?

Wand of Feather Step? Not an offensive spell, unless you consider using it on a charge build to be offensive, so never a weapon-like object?

Seriously, setting up wands as always weapon-like, as the first part does, means that, unless explicitly excluded, like in Quick Draw, it is treated as a weapon for usage. Also note that Quick Drawe explicitly excludes wands from being a target of Quick Draw. Drawing on the move does not.

Doesn't necessarily mean that the monster was played wrong. It could aim to kill players first like some necromancers or ghasts do.

Silver Crusade

Was the dying character below her con? If she was at 0 hp she still had a number of rounds equal to to her con to make a stablization roll.

I agree with Pirate Rob on drawin a cure CLW wand as a free action as part a move action as part of a move action that would negate quick draw. Invest in a spring loaded quick draw sheaf. I advise low level characters to tak a withdrawl Action at 3hp or below use your CLW wand or a potion of CLW. For non LG characters before going into combat use a wand of infernal healing.

Grand Lodge

Aikidoka wrote:
kinevon wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

I see an issue right there.

Full attacks, especially against an injured target, should be handled one attack at a time. Once the original target goes down, especially form the description in this game, the attacker would move on to a new target, especially since it didn't need to even take a 5' step to switch targets.

Claw, claw, bite?

Claw, target goes down, move on to next target with he second claw. No need to add insult to injury. Unless it was some sort of zombie ogre, and even then, it would have switched targets after the first one went down.

And, yes, I am of the school who thinks you can draw a wand on the move. Otherwise you get into all sorts of issues, even with the first part of the rules, when you start getting into defining when is a wand a weapon-like object, and when isn't it?

Wand of Magic Missile? Always weapon-like.

Wand of Cure/Inflict Light Wounds? Situationally an offensive spell, so sometimes weapon-like?

Wand of Feather Step? Not an offensive spell, unless you consider using it on a charge build to be offensive, so never a weapon-like object?

Seriously, setting up wands as always weapon-like, as the first part does, means that, unless explicitly excluded, like in Quick Draw, it is treated as a weapon for usage. Also note that Quick Drawe explicitly excludes wands from being a target of Quick Draw. Drawing on the move does not.

Doesn't necessarily mean that the monster was played wrong. It could aim to kill players first like some necromancers or ghasts do.

Unless the creature has some special tactics, that is very uncommon in PFS.

I know of at least one scenario, with a ghast in it, whose tactics are, basically, don't go for the paralyzed PCs until you have all the enemies taken care of. They are intelligent, so they want to take down multiple food sources, not just work on one.

If Joe goes down, use your remaining attacks on Harry, not on making sure Joe doesn't get back up, unless he has already been playing the yoyo.

And, for low tier, you are trying to make sure the players, especially if new, enjoy the experience, so they keep coming back...


I'm on the "restrictive" side of the debate. I remember a dev talking about quickdraw that magic items and alchemical objects were excluded because in a matter of balance, spells are far more effective for less actions. I still do need to find his post.

I always ruled it so you can only draw a weapon (a true one) as a free action as part of a movement.

On the item "accessibility", remember it's not meant to be unlimited and for everything, here's the most forgotten but used item of all time (except regular clothes):

"Ultimate Equipment, Gear, Adventuring Gear wrote:

Bandolier

Price 5 SP; Weight —

This leather belt is worn over one shoulder and runs diagonally across the chest and back. It has small loops or pouches for holding eight objects the size of a flask or small dagger. You can use the "retrieve a stored item" action to take an item from a bandolier. You can wear up to two bandoliers at the same time (any more than this and they get in each other's way and restrict your movement).

I ruled scrolls could be tied to it, but "beware unforeseen consequences", as I like intelligent enemies, I consider scrolls are fragile against water (What would be the use of the scroll case ?) and as I did read about rolling a 1 on a saving throw.
Spoiler:
Core Rulebook, Magic wrote:

Items Surviving after a Saving Throw: Unless the descriptive text for the spell specifies otherwise, all items carried or worn by a creature are assumed to survive a magical attack. If a creature rolls a natural 1 on its saving throw against the effect, however, an exposed item is harmed (if the attack can harm objects). Refer to Table: Items Affected by Magical Attacks: Items Affected by Magical Attacks. Determine which four objects carried or worn by the creature are most likely to be affected and roll randomly among them. The randomly determined item must make a saving throw against the attack form and take whatever damage the attack dealt.

If the selected item is not carried or worn and is not magical, it does not get a saving throw. It simply is dealt the appropriate damage.

It may seem a little bit of a nitpick, but I give the same options to my players: My BBEG have bandoliers or similar, not all of their magic items are accessible, etc etc...

I began to be this "strict" when I asked a player to describe himself while a group of foes tried to assess his fighting skills. The discussion went then about sundering, pickpocketing, and other matters I can't even remember.

If you want accessibility, to go farther than just 2 wrist sheaths, the following tricks are good too:

Objects compartments:
Ultimate Equipment, Gear, Adventuring Gear wrote:

Hollowed Pommel

Price 5 gp; Weight —

Depending on the weapon, a hollow pommel may hold something as large as a flask or as small as a rolled piece of paper. Detecting a hollow pommel requires a DC 15 Perception check.

Holy symbol, compartment
Price +5 gp; Weight —

Designed and approved by a member of the appropriate religion, this modification to a holy symbol creates a secret compartment large enough to hold a potion vial. Detecting the compartment requires a DC 20 Perception check.

Holy Symbol, Flask
Price +10 gp; Weight —

This version of a standard holy symbol is oversized and has a watertight compartment that can hold 1 pint (the same volume as a flask of holy water). Adventurers normally use the compartment to hold holy water or alcohol. A holy symbol flask is not meant for you to throw at enemies and is not fragile like a flask or vial. Like using holy water on incorporeal opponent, you unstopper the flask and pour the contents onto an adjacent target. Detecting the compartment requires a successful DC 10 Perception check.

False-bottomed scabbard
Price 45 gp; Weight 1 lb.

The space at the bottom of this sword scabbard is just large enough to hold a potion flask. Some are accessed from the outside; others open on the inside with a secret catch at the top end. Finding the secret compartment requires a DC 25 Perception check, or DC 20 if you can compare the sword's length to that of the scabbard.

Some (as I) may argue that you still have to use a move action to "draw" your scabbard, and I have the impression that few clerics or oracles are played as pure casters with their holy symbol always in hand, but it's still pretty useful IMO.
Just be aware that some dirty nicknames can randomly be heard when you begin to "suck your sword" in the middle of a battle.


HectorVivis wrote:
I always ruled it so you can only draw a weapon (a true one) as a free action as part of a movement.

Then why are wands described as weapon like in the preceding paragraph?

Quote:

Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item.

If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may draw a weapon as a free action combined with a regular move. If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one.

Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.


Because while drawing a non-weapon-like objects incur an attack of opportunity, weapon-like objects do not if they are in easy reach?

Both interpretations of the text can be correct IMO, and only a dev can give a final answer.
But for rule consistency with quickdraw and for concern with the action economy, I feel like a wand is not intended to be retrieved as a free action while moving.


HectorVivis wrote:
Because while drawing a non-weapon-like objects incur an attack of opportunity, weapon-like objects do not if they are in easy reach?

But that's not what it says. It merely says if it is in easy reach, you can draw weapon like objects in addition to actual weapons as a move action. If it isn't in easy reach, then you use a different action.

It says nothing about provoking.


The text seems utterly clear:

The action 'drawing a weapon' specifically includes weapon like objects including wands.

The action 'draw a weapon' may be done as a free action as part of a regular move (with BAB +1 or greater).

Therefore, wands can be drawn as part of move action. Otherwise you would have to insist that the action 'draw a weapon' is not the same as the action 'drawing a weapon' defined in the previous paragraph. In which case...what is it, and where is it defined?!

Furthermore, if the second 'draw a weapon' is not the same action as defined in the 1st paragraph, then one (with +1 BAB or higher) would be able to draw a weapon from anywhere as part of a move, because treating the retrieval from a backpack differently is defined only under the 'drawing a weapon' action from the 1st paragraph (and specifically includes 'weapon-like' objects).

I don't see how you can possibly enforce the 'easy reach' condition and ignore the 'weapon-like objects' during a draw+move action and be at all consistent with the text.


Tarantula wrote:
It says nothing about provoking.

It does, if you read the table. The action "Retrieve a stored item" provokes attacks of opportunity while "Draw a weapon" doesn't.

So when your object is "weapon-like" and in easy reach, you can use the "Draw a weapon" action, and you don't provoke.


The action is called draw or sheath a weapon. It then explains what the action of drawing a weapon is. It then explains this action. An be done withvweapon like objects.

It then explains you can do so with +1 bab. The text has already told you the draw weapon action can be done with weaponlike objects they don't need to be mentioned again.


The table does, sure. The "draw a weapon" text doesn't, because "draw a weapon" does not provoke. It says if the weapon-like object is not in easy reach, to treat it as "retrieve a stored item" instead.

Provoking is not directly mentioned.


Tarantula wrote:
Provoking is not directly mentioned.

... yeah, so ?

I think I missed your point.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

I understand there is table variance on this issue.

I let my players know, ahead of time, that (1) they cannot load scrolls into wrist sheaths, (2) activating a spring-loaded wrist sheath is a swift action that provokes, and (3) wands are not weapons and cannot be drawn as part of a movement action (but some rods are, and can).

There are some local variations in PFS, and if I know about them ahead of time, I'll give my ruling there, too. (I've GMed in one metropolitan area where the general practice is that wands in wrist-sheaths don't have to be drawn at all, but only touched by the other hand, a free action.)

I think that part of the issue with GMs who hold to a stricter ruling is that the news comes at the worst possible time, in the middle of combat. I've never had a player upset with my ruling, so long as it comes beforehand.

By the way, can we tone down the "if you disagree with my ruling on this, you're totally wrong; the text is obviously clear" rhetoric? That shuts down discussion instead of opening it.


Chris Mortika wrote:
I let my players know, ahead of time, that (1) they cannot load scrolls into wrist sheaths, (2) activating a spring-loaded wrist sheath is a swift action that provokes, and (3) wands are not weapons and cannot be drawn as part of a movement action (but some rods are, and can).

If I state that I am drawing an improvised weapon as part of my move action, do you allow that?

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Tarantula wrote:
If I state that I am drawing an improvised weapon as part of my move action, do you allow that?

Of course not. You are taking into you hand something -- a potion, a scroll, a magic item, a chair, your familiar -- that manifestly is not a weapon.


Chris Mortika wrote:
Tarantula wrote:
If I state that I am drawing an improvised weapon as part of my move action, do you allow that?
Of course not. You are taking into you hand something -- a potion, a scroll, a magic item, a chair, your familiar -- that manifestly is not a weapon.

What about an arrow I plan to use as a melee weapon? Or a hammer? Frying pan? Sledgehammer? Climbing tools? What if I have catch-off guard the feat?

What if I'm a Monk of the Empty Hand so all normal weapons are improvised weapons for me? Do I provoke for drawing a longsword?

Sczarni

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Actually, Chris, you might want to change your stance about the SLWS provoking.

Jason Bulmahn mentions HERE that the general rule regarding swift and free actions is that they don't provoke.

...and...

James Jacobs confirms HERE that swift actions aren't meant to provoke, either.

Up until I read Jason's comment recently, I only had James' comment to work off of. Now that we have two developers' comments, I changed my stance to "SLWS don't provoke".


Chris Mortika wrote:

I understand there is table variance on this issue.

I let my players know, ahead of time, that (1) they cannot load scrolls into wrist sheaths, (2) activating a spring-loaded wrist sheath is a swift action that provokes, and (3) wands are not weapons and cannot be drawn as part of a movement action (but some rods are, and can).

Interesting, do you then allow people to retrieve weapons from backpacks as part of a move action if they have a +1 BAB or greater?


Nefreet wrote:

Actually, Chris, you might want to change your stance about the SLWS provoking.

Jason Bulmahn mentions HERE that the general rule regarding swift and free actions is that they don't provoke.

...and...

James Jacobs confirms HERE that swift actions aren't meant to provoke, either.

Up until I read Jason's comment recently, I only had James' comment to work off of. Now that we have two developers' comments, I changed my stance to "SLWS don't provoke".

Wait so does that mean if you have pummeling bully via MoMS and not Imp trip/re position/whatever you don't provoke?

Quote:
I let my players know, ahead of time, that (1) they cannot load scrolls into wrist sheaths, (2) activating a spring-loaded wrist sheath is a swift action that provokes, and (3) wands are not weapons and cannot be drawn as part of a movement action (but some rods are, and can).

1) While I strongly dislike this sentiment because it exists solely to rob players of 1650g they invested into breath of life scrolls to save someone ELSE. It's a valid rule.

2) This is just patently wrong as the head designer states it's not the case.

3) This is straight up wrong and I would contact my VO and if I had to campaign leadership because it is wrong and it's wrong in the CRB alone and again like 1 serves no purpose but to kill PC's.

Quote:
Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat, or putting it away so that you have a free hand, requires a move action. This action also applies to weapon-like objects carried in easy reach, such as wands. If your weapon or weapon-like object is stored in a pack or otherwise out of easy reach, treat this action as retrieving a stored item.

If you don't spring this little rule in combat and announce it at the start the players are free to say it's as far from reach as their weapon. It' just like the argument above.

If you try to use a rule which can be solved by "I'd always do that" to kill a PC you're a jerk. If You try to tell them they store the weapon they've adventured with for 20 sessions in their backpack or in the PFS locker at the GL you're a jerk. If you try to retroactively bury a wand under other objects to kill a PC, you're a jerk.

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
Undone wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Actually, Chris, you might want to change your stance about the SLWS provoking.

Jason Bulmahn mentions HERE that the general rule regarding swift and free actions is that they don't provoke.

...and...

James Jacobs confirms HERE that swift actions aren't meant to provoke, either.

Up until I read Jason's comment recently, I only had James' comment to work off of. Now that we have two developers' comments, I changed my stance to "SLWS don't provoke".

Wait so does that mean if you have Pummeling Bully via MoMS and not Imp trip/re position/whatever you don't provoke?

It would appear that the free Trip attempt via Pummeling Bully would not provoke. I liken it to a Wolf getting its free Trip attempt after a successful Bite attack.

Though I don't see what MoMS has to do with it.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Undone wrote:
Quote:
I let my players know, ahead of time, that (1) they cannot load scrolls into wrist sheaths, (2) activating a spring-loaded wrist sheath is a swift action that provokes, and (3) wands are not weapons and cannot be drawn as part of a movement action (but some rods are, and can).

1) While I strongly dislike this sentiment because it exists solely to rob players of 1650g they invested into breath of life scrolls to save someone ELSE. It's a valid rule.

2) This is just patently wrong as the head designer states it's not the case.

3) This is straight up wrong and I would contact my VO and if I had to campaign leadership because it is wrong and it's wrong in the CRB alone and again like 1 serves no purpose but to kill PC's.

I believe Chris is talking about houserules for his home game. This is not the PFS forum right now.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
I believe Chris is talking about houserules for his home game. This is not the PFS forum right now.

No, but it is the Rules Questions forum. Not the Advice which is usually where houserules are discussed.

Paizo Employee Designer

Nefreet wrote:

Actually, Chris, you might want to change your stance about the SLWS provoking.

Jason Bulmahn mentions HERE that the general rule regarding swift and free actions is that they don't provoke.

As the person who edited that comment into Jason's post, I will say that some swift and free actions provoke (such as reloading a gun).

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Alright, Mark, so do Spring Loaded Wrist Sheaths provoke?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Tarantula wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
I believe Chris is talking about houserules for his home game. This is not the PFS forum right now.
No, but it is the Rules Questions forum. Not the Advice which is usually where houserules are discussed.

Which is why he lets his players know ahead of time how he rules things.

The fact we are in the rules forum is not a ban on mentions of houserules.


Nefreet wrote:
Alright, Mark, so do Spring Loaded Wrist Sheaths provoke?

Since it says it otherwise works like a standard wrist sheath, it seems so. Not an official pronouncement or anything though.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

_Ozy_ wrote:


Interesting, do you then allow people to retrieve weapons from backpacks as part of a move action if they have a +1 BAB or greater?

Of course not. That's at least a move action, if the object is easily accessible, and provokes attacks of opportunity. If it's buried deep in the backpack, it may take several rounds.

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Alright, Mark, so do Spring Loaded Wrist Sheaths provoke?
Since it says it otherwise works like a standard wrist sheath, it seems so. Not an official pronouncement or anything though.

What are your thoughts on James' explanation?

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I believe Chris is talking about houserules for his home game. This is not the PFS forum right now.

Wherever this thread is currently, it was once in the PFS forums., I only run Pathfinder as a PFS game.


Nefreet wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Alright, Mark, so do Spring Loaded Wrist Sheaths provoke?
Since it says it otherwise works like a standard wrist sheath, it seems so. Not an official pronouncement or anything though.
What are your thoughts on James' explanation?

They make sense to me from a story perspective, and honestly in home games, I generally rule the same way as James did for the same reason.

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

So, using yours and James' logic, and the comment you edited into Jason's post, would it be reasonable to rule that SLWS don't provoke?

Because until your comments just now, I figured it all made sense.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Chris Mortika wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:

I believe Chris is talking about houserules for his home game. This is not the PFS forum right now.

Wherever this thread is currently, it was once in the PFS forums., I only run Pathfinder as a PFS game.

Comment retracted. Carry on.


Nefreet wrote:

So, using yours and James' logic, and the comment you edited into Jason's post, would it be reasonable to rule that SLWS don't provoke?

Because until your comments just now, I figured it all made sense.

I can't see much justification for it in the strict rules, given it says it acts as a normal wrist sheath, but I'm happy to houserule it into home games anyway. It's Adventurer's Armory, so I can't really help you with a FAQ.


Mark Seifter wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Actually, Chris, you might want to change your stance about the SLWS provoking.

Jason Bulmahn mentions HERE that the general rule regarding swift and free actions is that they don't provoke.

As the person who edited that comment into Jason's post, I will say that some swift and free actions provoke (such as reloading a gun).

Out of curiosity could you settle the question of using pummeling bully without the feat associated being a provoking action?

Sczarni

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

So, using yours and James' logic, and the comment you edited into Jason's post, would it be reasonable to rule that SLWS don't provoke?

Because until your comments just now, I figured it all made sense.

I can't see much justification for it in the strict rules, given it says it acts as a normal wrist sheath, but I'm happy to houserule it into home games anyway. It's Adventurer's Armory, so I can't really help you with a FAQ.

Like Chris, I don't do homegames.

I think we're both interested in something we can rule for our PFS games.


Undone wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

Actually, Chris, you might want to change your stance about the SLWS provoking.

Jason Bulmahn mentions HERE that the general rule regarding swift and free actions is that they don't provoke.

As the person who edited that comment into Jason's post, I will say that some swift and free actions provoke (such as reloading a gun).
Out of curiosity could you settle the question of using pummeling bully without the feat associated being a provoking action?

I can't "settle" anything, but it seems to me that given it's a trip attempt that is not using the monster Trip ability, it would normally provoke from your trip target. That said, barring shenanigans (which, of course, are a common way to get style feats, for better or worse), you'll have Improved Trip anyway to take this feat.


Chris Mortika wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:

I believe Chris is talking about houserules for his home game. This is not the PFS forum right now.

Wherever this thread is currently, it was once in the PFS forums., I only run Pathfinder as a PFS game.

Well, I'm glad you're upfront about your rules. I would walk immediately. Those are not how the rules are laid out in the Core book for wands as weapons and being drawn like weapons.

Also, you never answered how you would address improvised weapons.

51 to 100 of 160 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Does PFS negate wands from being drawn while moving? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.