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.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.
Like Chris, I don't do homegames.
I think we're both interested in something we can rule for our PFS games.
While the RAW seems to lean the other way, it isn't 100% spelled out, and no NPC I've seen in PFS ever uses the things, so if you let players avoid provoking, I doubt they will make an issue at the table. Just when you're a player, if you accept the other ruling graciously, things should probably be OK.
|
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.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.
Also, it doesn't act just as a normal wrist sheath:
This item works like a standard wrist sheath, but releasing an item from it is a swift action.
The "but" changes things.
So, when you edited Jason's comment, what "general rules" were you referring to?
Because I'm really confused now.
Why edit it, at all?
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.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.
Also, it doesn't act just as a normal wrist sheath:
This item works like a standard wrist sheath, but releasing an item from it is a swift action.The "but" changes things.
So, when you edited Jason's comment, what "general rules" were you referring to?
Because I'm really confused now.
Why edit it, at all?
I edited in all those clarifications to explain the kineticist. In that case, someone in the kineticist thread found a rule that non-actions or things that are "part of an action" don't themselves provoke, so I put it there to let people know that kinetic blade thus doesn't provoke.
Well, SLWS can't hold scrolls anyways, so that's a moot point.
Interesting. Hadn't seen that one. I'm curious to read it; got a link?
The only problem is the SLWS are literally a matter of life and death due to breath of life scrolls, and as such are in desperate need of clarification.
Change your play style to not rely on SLWS with breath of life scrolls then. We've never used them and never had a sudden need of them to save lives. Play slightly less recklessly.
Of course ;-)Well, SLWS can't hold scrolls anyways, so that's a moot point.Interesting. Hadn't seen that one. I'm curious to read it; got a link?
Does that definitively block scrolls?
It does, in PFS.
Based on the "physical description" section of scrolls, it still seems as ambiguous as ever on whether it would fit. I may be missing something though. At the risk of becoming like a character in a Phoenix Wright game, can you tell me which new phrase in the description generates the contradiction?
In order to avoid table variation, we can only go off of what's listed in the description of the item.
Scrolls are not on that list.
Ah, only what's listed, I see. I don't think that's a universal PFS rule, though, is it? Mike seems in your link to be specifically referring to the summon minor monster spell. I can see a lot of danger, with situations like "If the PCs have any visible weapons with them, such as swords, which Enpeesee dislikes the most, Enpeesee refuses to allow them entrance to the museum" allowing PCs with axes to enter the museum because only swords are listed.
In this case, that would mean that a kukri or starknife, for instance, despite basically being the same size and shape as a dagger, wouldn't pass muster.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Well, I'm glad you're upfront about your rules. I would walk immediately.
As would be your right. Go find a table where the GM is more to your liking. Everybody'll be happier.
Those are not how the rules are laid out in the Core book for wands as weapons and being drawn like weapons.
I'm up-to-date on the arguments on either side. It's a gray area. See "Quick Draw".
Also, you never answered how you would address improvised weapons.
Sure about that? I see my response upthread.
Basically, a "weapon" is a category of object in the game, the same as "ring" or "shield." Using a book to block an attack doesn't make it a shield. (I can't enhance it with shield enchantments, for example.) Likewise, a bedroll isn't a weapon,even if I intend to whomp someone over the head with it.
"Improvised weapons" are, by definition, non-weapon objects being used as if they were weapons. You can't make a +1 shocking scroll, and you can't "draw" it as part of a move action.
|
|
Ah, only what's listed, I see. I don't think that's a universal PFS rule, though, is it? Mike seems in your link to be specifically referring to the summon minor monster spell.In order to avoid table variation, we can only go off of what's listed in the description of the item.
Scrolls are not on that list.
He actually confirmed Carlos' comment earlier in that thread, which stated "in PFS, in order to avoid table variation, we go with what's listed".
And so, since it's an Adventurers Armory item, you said you can't FAQ it, right?
So, in PFS, no scrolls.
Ah, only what's listed, I see. I don't think that's a universal PFS rule, though, is it? Mike seems in your link to be specifically referring to the summon minor monster spell.In order to avoid table variation, we can only go off of what's listed in the description of the item.
Scrolls are not on that list.
He actually confirmed Carlos' comment earlier in that thread, which stated "in PFS, in order to avoid table variation, we go with what's listed".
And so, since it's an Adventurers Armory item, you said you can't FAQ it, right?
So, in PFS, no scrolls.
Carlos's earlier post in the linked thread actually mentioned there being table variation when you go off of such a list. I think we are in an area of table variation, so for now, while I intend to continue allowing them, I also completely respect Chris standing his ground and not allowing them. I have played at Chris's table before and would happily play at his table again and just not use my scrolls in wrist-sheaths if it's one of my characters who has scrolls instead of wands.
(I have to get going to my PFS game tonight, tho, but it's been a wonderful discussion)
I still really wish you hadn't re-edited Jason's comment, tho.
That made me sad.
I actually edited it before ever posting in this thread, after the playtest ended, because people had been mentioning that it was confusing/misleading.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Well, I'm glad you're upfront about your rules. I would walk immediately.
As would be your right. Go find a table where the GM is more to your liking. Everybody'll be happier.
Those are not how the rules are laid out in the Core book for wands as weapons and being drawn like weapons.I'm up-to-date on the arguments on either side. It's a gray area. See "Quick Draw".
Also, you never answered how you would address improvised weapons.Sure about that? I see my response upthread.
...Chris, I think what you're ACTUALLY saying about wands is only that you don't allow the on-the-move draw, but earlier you said that you don't count them as weapon-like objects (presumably, AT ALL), and THAT is in explicit contradiction to the rules, as the CRB uses wands as an example of a weapon-like object that uses the "draw a weapon" action.
So if I'm following right, your WORDS were provably wrong, but what I think you MEANT is a more readily-debated topic. I think Tarantula believes your meaning matches your words, and is chafing against your words' contradiction of the text.
Hope that helps. :)
|
|
I actually edited it before ever posting in this thread, after the playtest ended, because people had been mentioning that it was confusing/misleading.(I have to get going to my PFS game tonight, tho, but it's been a wonderful discussion)
I still really wish you hadn't re-edited Jason's comment, tho.
That made me sad.
I'm sorry, that's not true.
I read it before I linked it today.
In fact, I FOUND it before linking it by searching Jason's recent comments for the word "swift".
Now I'm really sad.
I actually edited it before ever posting in this thread, after the playtest ended, because people had been mentioning that it was confusing/misleading.(I have to get going to my PFS game tonight, tho, but it's been a wonderful discussion)
I still really wish you hadn't re-edited Jason's comment, tho.
That made me sad.
I'm sorry, that's not true.
I read it before I linked it today.
In fact, I FOUND it by searching Jason's recent comments for the word "swift".
Now I'm really sad.
It is very possible (in fact, it must be true) that you found it and linked it before I edited it. I edited it before I joined this thread and after the playtest's closing, probably a bit before 4PM, and I posted to this thread shortly afterwards to further clarify.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
...Chris, I think what you're ACTUALLY saying about wands is only that you don't allow the on-the-move draw, but earlier you said that you don't count them as weapon-like objects (presumably, AT ALL), and THAT is in explicit contradiction to the rules, as the CRB uses wands as an example of a weapon-like object that uses the "draw a weapon" action.
Thanks. Yes. for purposes of provoking attacks, draw a wand. For purposes of doing it as part of movement, no.
Thanks. Yes. for purposes of provoking attacks, draw a wand. For purposes of doing it as part of movement, no.
...Chris, I think what you're ACTUALLY saying about wands is only that you don't allow the on-the-move draw, but earlier you said that you don't count them as weapon-like objects (presumably, AT ALL), and THAT is in explicit contradiction to the rules, as the CRB uses wands as an example of a weapon-like object that uses the "draw a weapon" action.
Ah, okay, thanks.
Also you still sidestepped my corner cases of weapons being drawn for use as improvised weapons, such as an arrow being drawn for use as an improvised melee weapon. Or a empty hand monk drawing any actual weapon but using it as an improvised melee weapon. Or a character with catch off guard which is effectively proficient in improvised melee weapons.
My ruling is that proficiency doesn't matter. My 2nd-level rogue can draw a battleaxe she's not proficient with as part of a move action, because a battleaxe is a weapon.
So then all improvised weapons count, since they are also weapons.
|
I haven't encountered a GM that allows scrolls in SLWS, and I've done PFS across the nation for over 2 years now.
(okay, now I'm really going)
I do. I'm sort of the opposite, I've never really met one that was opposed to it, particularly as the primary, and likely only use for doing so is going to be to save another player's character's life, either through scrolls of healing or Breath of Life.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
So then all improvised weapons count, since they are also weapons.
Deep sigh. I wasn't sure if you were trolling before, but that sealed it. You are welcome to sit at my table and try drawing a potion as part of a move action "because it's an improvised weapon." You are also welcome to read my previous comments for content.
Undone, you have called me a jerk while procliming that I'm just trying to kill PCs. If anyone else were to have made your comment, I'd reply with a discussion of the scrollmaster archetype. I do not choose to dignify your participation in this thread with such a discussion.
So then all improvised weapons count, since they are also weapons.Deep sigh. I wasn't sure if you were trolling before, but that sealed it. You are welcome to sit at my table and try drawing a potion as part of a move action "because it's an improvised weapon." You are also welcome to read my previous comments for content.
I'm not trolling. I'm looking for a logical consistency in your ruling. Would a monk of the empty hand provoke drawing anything in your games? Just because he treats all weapons as improvised weapons?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I've just read Monk of the Empty Hand twice, and to be honest I have no idea how that class works.
It treats normal weapons as if they were improvised weapons. That is, it treats weapons (objects in the category "weapons") as if they were non-weapons being used as weapons. But then it can flurry with open hands or any improvised weapon -- which I guess includes any normal weapon.
Geez, I don't know. I suppose that such a character would not be able to take the "draw / sheathe a weapon" action at all, except with shuriken.
I've just read Monk of the Empty Hand twice, and to be honest I have no idea how that class works.
It treats normal weapons as if they were improvised weapons. That is, it treats weapons (objects in the category "weapons") as if they were non-weapons being used as weapons. But then it can flurry with open hands or any improvised weapon -- which I guess includes any normal weapon.
Geez, I don't know. I suppose that such a character would not be able to take the "draw / sheathe a weapon" action at all, except with shuriken.
And how about drawing arrows? They are ammunition and maybe weapons? Normally drawing them is a free action and they don't provoke. But they can also explicitly be used as an improvised melee dagger.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Why are you pressing these corner cases, Tarantula? What's the point?
Ozy, there are all sorts of game rules that make more sense in the center than around the edges. (One SKR posted about, just tonight: a halfling on a 5'-high platform gets a +1 melee attack bonus from attacking from height. But the 15'-tall ogre next to him does not.)
If you have an iron bar, roughly the length and weight of a light mace, then it's probably a light mace.
The game has a category of objects called "weapons". They can be made masterwork, to strike more often. They can be made magical, and enhanced with "weapon enhancements." Can your iron bar be the target of masterwork transformation? Can it be a +1, flaming iron bar? Either way you decide, somebody's sure to think that the answer is ridiculous.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Chris: I find your citation of Quick Draw as a reason to disallow the drawing of weapon-like objects for free during a move if you have a +1 BAB, to be an argument for allowing it.
Citation: Specific trumps general.
Quick Draw specifically says it does not apply to wands, trumping the general rule that weapon-like objects are treated like weapons.
So, since Quick Draw specifically says it won't work for wands, it appears that the general rule should be that wands are, usually, treated for all intents and purposes, like drawing for free on the move, as weapons.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Yes Ozy, at my table "improvised weapons" are, "objects not crafted to be weapons [but which] nonetheless see use in combat."
Looking through the PRD, I don't find "a category called improvised weapons". What I find is a description of how to adjudicate non-weapons being used in combat. That section of the rules is just under the "weapon size" rules.
kinevon, I hear what you're saying, but I wouldn't agree. Is that not just as good a justification that potions and scrolls should be considered weapon-like objects, able to be drawn as part of a movement?
|
I wouldn't allow scrolls in SLWS mainly because they're not rigid enough; all the objects that you can safely eject with the SLWS are rigid. Trying to eject a scroll would probably crumple or tear it.
I could definitely imagine scrolls made of alternative materials, maybe some sort of stone tablet or inscribed bone or something that would work in a SLWS, and in a home game I'd allow that; but that doesn't exist in PFS.
In PFS, I think it's reckless as a player to expect scrolls in a SLWS to always be possible. A sizeable population of GMs may allow it, but you'd be foolish to rely on it without asking in advance.
---
Regarding wands: I'd say that wands can be drawn while moving, because they've been mentioned as being similar enough to weapons to use the Draw Weapon action. Yes, that's only in the first paragraph of that section, not in the second. My interpretation is that this does not signify a design decision to disallow drawing wands on the move.
Rather, it's a matter of writing style. In many many many places in Paizo books (as well as just about every other RPG) the writers chose brevity over absolute precision. This makes the text easier to read, which is important because it makes it easier and faster, and also less unpleasant. Imagine the text read "weapons and weaponlike objects, such as wands" every single time they meant that, the section would read like a piece legal code. And how many people enjoy reading those?
Continuously stating the entire definition every time it's used is also confusing; for example in the Swashbuckler class the term "light and one-handed piercing melee weapons" is used 18 times, and 1 time there's "one-handed and light piercing melee weapons". Did the writer mean something different in that instance? It's hard to tell; probably not. At any rate, it's awkward writing. If the writer had defined "Swashbuckler weapons are light and one-handed piercing melee weapons" just once, and then referred to "swashbuckler weapons" throughout the class description, he'd have saved 68 words, reduced confusion, and made the text more pleasant to read.
For those who do computer programming, this principle is also well-known; it's usually better to write a piece of code once and then use a keyword to refer to it whenever you re-use it, rather than copy-paste it everywhere. If you later have to update the code, it's much easier to apply the update to all uses of that code.
So, it's my interpretation that wands are defined to be sufficiently like weapons in the first paragraph of the Draw Weapon section, and that this continues to be true in the second paragraph of the same section.
I wouldn't allow scrolls in SLWS mainly because they're not rigid enough; all the objects that you can safely eject with the SLWS are rigid. Trying to eject a scroll would probably crumple or tear it.
I wouldn't allow scrolls in a SLWS not because of that - but because of this line.
Physical Description: A scroll is a heavy sheet of fine vellum or high-quality paper. An area about 8-1/2 inches wide and 11 inches long is sufficient to hold one spell. The sheet is reinforced at the top and bottom with strips of leather slightly longer than the sheet is wide. A scroll holding more than one spell has the same width (about 8-1/2 inches) but is an extra foot or so long for each additional spell. Scrolls that hold three or more spells are usually fitted with reinforcing rods at each end rather than simple strips of leather. A scroll has AC 9, 1 hit point, hardness 0, and a break DC of 8.
To protect it from wrinkling or tearing, a scroll is rolled up from both ends to form a double cylinder. (This also helps the user unroll the scroll quickly.) The scroll is placed in a tube of ivory, jade, leather, metal, or wood. Most scroll cases are inscribed with magic symbols which often identify the owner or the spells stored on the scrolls inside. The symbols sometimes hide magic traps.
Emphasis mine. Scrolls are kept in tubes. Tubes are presumably a bit big to put in a SLWS.
|
Interesting. I have had potions in a Spring-Loaded Wrist Sheath in PFS games, and twice have had them save my bacon because of Touch of the Sea. Indeed, I first bought the SLWS at the suggestion of a GM (really, an NPC) that we might want to have these things with appropriate potions ready before going out on a boat.
But, but the "only the examples listed are actually allowed" rule, potions shouldn't be allowed in a SLWS.
Expect table variation on that one, I suppose. One more (on an incredibly long list) thing I should probably remember to ask my GM at the beginning of every game. This is the hazard of playing the same character with lots of different GMs; little things that you set up for your character that you think you have available you may suddenly discover you don't have available just for the day.... Nominally, yes, if the GM is up front at the beginning of the scenario, you're fine. But, there are so many little things like this that could come up that no realistic GM is going to hit all of them at the beginning of a game.
Specifically with regard to the topic of this post: we need a FAQ on whether or not a wand can be drawn just like a weapon as part of a move if you have BAB of +1 or greater. My reading (and many other folks' reading) is that the RAW and RAI are extremely clear on this, and the answer is yes. But, other people have another reading. That means that even though my opinion is that the rules are clear, objectively they are obviously not clear. So, an FAQ is needed. This is something that comes up from time to time (as this thread evidences), and an FAQ would solve it for once and for all. Mark? Please?
Is using potions with SLWS legal? If so that seems like a nice trick.
I agree that a FAQ is needed to resolve the issue of drawing a "weapon-like" wand as a "weapon" while moving. I still think it seems like a pretty minor issue and hope that might make it easier to reach a decision on.
Drawing improvised weapons while moving (or as weapons in general) seems like a bigger and stranger issue which possibly deserves its own discussion.
While I'm happy with assuming a party has weapons out and ready when in hostile territory however if you get ambushed in a social situation and haven't acted then you didn't have a sword out unless it was already said.
Or lvl 3 swashbuckler with quick draw :P
|
|
Is using potions with SLWS legal? If so that seems like a nice trick.
I used to think so, but this thread has me questioning that. Since it seams that when there is an item that lists examples of things that can be used with it, only those examples are legal, the answer would probably be no. This defies common sense... but the problem with relying on common sense is that there are edge cases where one person's common sense conflicts with another person's common sense.
|
|
Is using potions with SLWS legal? If so that seems like a nice trick.I used to think so, but this thread has me questioning that. Since it seams that when there is an item that lists examples of things that can be used with it, only those examples are legal, the answer would probably be no. This defies common sense... but the problem with relying on common sense is that there are edge cases where one person's common sense conflicts with another person's common sense.
Keep in mind, the "only" clause is for PFS.
To limit table variation, we go by the examples given.
That way, no matter what table you go to, you *should* expect the same results.
Otherwise, you could come up with any # of ideas, come to rely on them, go to a new table, and find that a GM says "no".
Like potion vials, or scrolls.
Limiting options to what's stated in print alleviates that dilemma, and everyone can expect the same thing.
In a home game, consult your GM.