The same thing comes up with the inquisitor - his Judgment ability only works until the end of combat. And that means it cannot be used outside of combat. If it could, the inquisitor could have constant Fast Healing on.
|
I am not finding that.
What book is it in?
I think he's talking about Channeling Force, a feat from the Advanced Class Guide (page 143).
To answer the OP's question, it's my opinion that the effect is not intended for use outside of combat. Combat is described as a series of combat rounds (as per "How Combat Works"). While I can't speak for the Devs, I doubt they intended that you activate this ability outside of combat, then walk around all day (or several days) waiting for a combat to begin. On the other hand, I don't think they'd have a problem with you activating this ability immediately before combat starts (pre-casting as it were), though I could see a hard-liner saying "No, only in combat".
I agree with Captain Zoom
The "when combat ends" and "can't be used outside of combat" effects have always confused me. RAW, you can't use them outside of combat, but that raises some questions.
How is a monk, especially a monk with a Vow of Peace, supposed to learn and practice the style feats?
I've looked over the combat rules, but I couldn't find any specific rulings for when combat initiates. Do you have to have an combatant? Or is merely wanting to punch something, anything, or some other aggressive mentality enough?
Most of the effects that can't be used outside of combat don't gum up the works too badly. But the style feats have some effects that would be useful outside of combat. Dragon Style is an obvious one. Walking through rough terrain would be an inconvenience. Being able to use the crazy acrobatics of Dragon Style to easily run through it would be convenient. But, RAW, you can only do that if there happens to be someone that wants to stab you nearby.
I would run the style feats in the same manor as the Tomb of Battle stances. You stretch, or whatever, to activate the style(represented by the swift action) and then stay in that style until you end it by switching styles, going to sleep, or some other manor along these lines. This however, is a house rule and thus not useful to you.
Does anyone know the specific circumstances that initiate combat?
I think it's rolling initiative or an attack roll that starts combat.
I think it's rolling initiative or an attack roll that starts combat.
But the first step of the combat sequence rules state:
1. When combat begins, all combatants roll initiative.
So combat has to technically begin before you can roll initiative. This also means you have to roll initiative before you can attack or take any actions, so that can't be what initiates combat.
I think it's rolling initiative or an attack roll that starts combat.But the first step of the combat sequence rules state:
1. When combat begins, all combatants roll initiative.
So combat has to technically begin before you can roll initiative. This also means you have to roll initiative before you can attack or take any actions, so that can't be what initiates combat.
You just pointed out what I said and then got the wrong meaning. When combat starts roll initiative. It's equal, the start of combat is rolling initiative. It doesn't say after combat begins roll initiative. So rolling initiative is a time when combat begins for sure.
Now there are times where as a PC you could say, I slash the guy next to me, I shoot an arrow at the guy talking or I hit the barkeep. so you do that and then you'd roll initiative. I'm not sure off had as to a rule that would let this be the start of combat or if you'd have to wait till initiative rolls were done to start combat.
You'd state your intent to shoot the guy or punch the barkeep, and they'd get a perception check to see if they notice. At that point, everyone rolls initiative. If the guy or barkeep didn't notice you, you'd attack at your initiative spot in the surprise round. If anyone else spotted you and wanted to stop you, you'd check init rolls.
That's the way I've always seen it done, anyway.
I think it's rolling initiative or an attack roll that starts combat.But the first step of the combat sequence rules state:
1. When combat begins, all combatants roll initiative.
So combat has to technically begin before you can roll initiative. This also means you have to roll initiative before you can attack or take any actions, so that can't be what initiates combat.
You just pointed out what I said and then got the wrong meaning. When combat starts roll initiative. It's equal, the start of combat is rolling initiative. It doesn't say after combat begins roll initiative. So rolling initiative is a time when combat begins for sure.
Now there are times where as a PC you could say, I slash the guy next to me, I shoot an arrow at the guy talking or I hit the barkeep. so you do that and then you'd roll initiative. I'm not sure off had as to a rule that would let this be the start of combat or if you'd have to wait till initiative rolls were done to start combat.
But that isn't what the wording says. If the start of combat was rolling initiative the wording would be "1. Combat begins when initiative is rolled." As the wording currently stands, combat would have to begin and then you roll initiative. Certainly the two are tied together, and may even happen at the same time, but they are not the same event.
So in your examples, the sequence would follow as thus:
1. The PC says they attack.
2. At some point, combat begins.
3. When combat begins, initiative is rolled.
4. You determine which characters are aware of their opponents. These characters can act during a surprise round. If all the characters are aware of their opponents, proceed with normal rounds. Let's assume a normal round
5. Combatants act in initiative order (highest to lowest). This would be the step where the attack actually happens.
6. When everyone has had a turn, the next round begins with the combatant with the highest initiative, and steps 4 and 5 repeat.
So at some point between the PC declaring his intention to attack and the rolling of initiative, combat begins. But when is that specific point? And what are the rules for determining when combat begins?
So in your examples, the sequence would follow as thus:
1. The PC says they attack.
2. At some point, combat begins.
3. When combat begins, initiative is rolled.
4. You determine which characters are aware of their opponents. These characters can act during a surprise round. If all the characters are aware of their opponents, proceed with normal rounds. Let's assume a normal round
5. Combatants act in initiative order (highest to lowest). This would be the step where the attack actually happens.
6. When everyone has had a turn, the next round begins with the combatant with the highest initiative, and steps 3 and 4 repeat.So at some point between the PC declaring his intention to attack and the rolling of initiative, combat begins. But when is that specific point? And what are the rules for determining when combat begins?
All those items occur at the same time, the intent to attack triggers the start of combat which necessitates the init roll. So, the specific point is the 1/2 second between the two? It's virtually at the same time, so why does the exact moment matter? Before combat (the actually smashing or slashing of each other) can begin, initiative has to be established. So even if combat starts *before* that, nobody can act until then, so it's sort of a moot point.
So if the intent is to show how an effect that lasts till the end of combat could be triggered by this, sure, the person could declare intent to attack something, init would be rolled. The character then has the choice to attack, or move away from combat. Either way, the attacks will resolve the combat, or the act of leaving the combat will end the combat, and the effect would end.
As to how a person would practice styles, they could attack whatever object (practice dummy for example) they wanted to, and activate the style, since they are actively engaging in combat activities. It's also assumed that practice takes place during downtime, so it isn't necessary to have the PC use the /day item during regular play.
So in your examples, the sequence would follow as thus:
1. The PC says they attack.
2. At some point, combat begins.
3. When combat begins, initiative is rolled.
4. You determine which characters are aware of their opponents. These characters can act during a surprise round. If all the characters are aware of their opponents, proceed with normal rounds. Let's assume a normal round
5. Combatants act in initiative order (highest to lowest). This would be the step where the attack actually happens.
6. When everyone has had a turn, the next round begins with the combatant with the highest initiative, and steps 3 and 4 repeat.So at some point between the PC declaring his intention to attack and the rolling of initiative, combat begins. But when is that specific point? And what are the rules for determining when combat begins?
All those items occur at the same time, the intent to attack triggers the start of combat which necessitates the init roll. So, the specific point is the 1/2 second between the two? It's virtually at the same time, so why does the exact moment matter? Before combat (the actually smashing or slashing of each other) can begin, initiative has to be established. So even if combat starts *before* that, nobody can act until then, so it's sort of a moot point.
So if the intent is to show how an effect that lasts till the end of combat could be triggered by this, sure, the person could declare intent to attack something, init would be rolled. The character then has the choice to attack, or move away from combat. Either way, the attacks will resolve the combat, or the act of leaving the combat will end the combat, and the effect would end.
As to how a person would practice styles, they could attack whatever object (practice dummy for example) they wanted to, and activate the style, since they are actively engaging in combat activities. It's also assumed that practice takes place during downtime, so it isn't necessary to have the PC use the /day item...
One of the questions is, yes, what is the particular instance where combat actually begins in the sequence of events. This is somewhat of a thought experiment.
The other is, what are the exact qualifiers for combat to begin according to RAW? Do you require an active and living opponent, or does punching a wooden dummy count as initiating combat? Does punching the air? If so, when does combat end in this situation? After the punch is done? Does it begin again for the next punch or does combat just end when you are "done"?
I ask this because if the rules state you can begin combat with a dummy and then stay in combat as long you as you keep spending turns attacking it, then that opens up some exploits for things, such as the Inquisitor's judgements.
So if they're exploits, they're obviously trying to get around the rules for an unfair advantage, at which point it shouldn't be allowed. Also, if you are practicing combat against a foe, dummy or imagined, once combat is done, you're done.
Yes, I suppose you could then say that your character is *ALWAYS* practicing against something, but that clearly is totally implausible, and intended purely as an exploit. Even the most complex Kata only last for a few minutes, and are pretty damned exhausting. There's no way a person could maintain that for extended periods.
Basically, the exploit is like the duck. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. If it's an exploit, it's not in the spirit of the game and should be eliminated.
Look the phrase is when this do this, So when combat is beginning all combatants roll initiative. It's not after, it's the effect of combat starting. Much like, when the bell rings class starts. Off of this wording class doesn't start after the bell, but as soon as it begins to ring. There isn't a different point in time, they happen simultaneously. So it would be the exact same moment.
also I guess off of that, if your GM lets you roll initiative to fight that dummy then it's maybe combat. I'm not sure if you can roll initiative outside of combat.
So if they're exploits, they're obviously trying to get around the rules for an unfair advantage, at which point it shouldn't be allowed. Also, if you are practicing combat against a foe, dummy or imagined, once combat is done, you're done.
Yes, I suppose you could then say that your character is *ALWAYS* practicing against something, but that clearly is totally implausible, and intended purely as an exploit. Even the most complex Kata only last for a few minutes, and are pretty damned exhausting. There's no way a person could maintain that for extended periods.
Basically, the exploit is like the duck. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. If it's an exploit, it's not in the spirit of the game and should be eliminated.
Yes, the general idea being you could carry around a rag doll and "fight" it all day to have say the healing judgement(or whatever) activated for large swathes of time.
I agree that is an exploit and would not allow it, but that would be a house rule, which as has been pointed out numerous times, is not the point of this forum. This is why I'm trying to find the RAW on the matter.
I'd have a hard time with a "rag doll". just Punching it, or stabbing once in awhile doesn't simulate combat. So, if someone were really intent on doing this, I would rule that they would have to be actively engaging in simulated combat, much like the way a martial artist does when they perform Kata.
Unless they want to carry around a life sized rag doll, and be in active combat with it all day, which means they'd get to do nothing else. Also, imagine how any civilized person would look on the crazy person that fights a rag doll all day? Any time they ran into an encounter where the goal may be to change an NPC's attitude using social skills would take a serious hit when they saw the lunatic beating up a life sized rag doll. ;)
I try not to say "That just won't work." I try to let my PCs try whatever they want. They just get to see the consequences of what happens when they try. Most of the time if it's absurd like that, they quit because it has reprocussions :D
Look the phrase is when this do this, So when combat is beginning all combatants roll initiative. It's not after, it's the effect of combat starting. Much like, when the bell rings class starts. Off of this wording class doesn't start after the bell, but as soon as it begins to ring. There isn't a different point in time, they happen simultaneously. So it would be the exact same moment.
also I guess off of that, if your GM lets you roll initiative to fight that dummy then it's maybe combat. I'm not sure if you can roll initiative outside of combat.
As I've stated, the "when" of combat is just a thought experiment and even acknowledge the simultaneous events. But the question is still "when"? When in this near instantaneous moment of time does all of this go down? It's a question unlikely to have an answer. Even if it did, it's unlikely the answer would be of any use. Just something fun to think about.
The "when combat ends" and "can't be used outside of combat" effects have always confused me. RAW, you can't use them outside of combat, but that raises some questions.
How is a monk, especially a monk with a Vow of Peace, supposed to learn and practice the style feats?
...thinking about it, the way you could do this also answers the original question of the thread- how to use the ability when enemies are not around?
Answer- Throw a punch at the fighter. Have him throw punches at you. IE- a sparring match. It is a fairly important part of learning any martial art.
Not sure if this is always useful, but it certainly presents an answer. If you find that the ability would still be useful in the dozen or so rounds that you two flail at each other, then feel free.
Obviously, no one should use enhancements or power attack, since putting nonlethal damage on yourselves is probably not very conducive to....whatever it is you are doing.
Now, it has been suggested that you use a practice dummy (and realistically that might work), but it might not exactly work in game (since objects rarely make good opponents.... unless the wizard has animate object). The spar at least has some cost (you get a small bit of nonlethal damage)
The "when combat ends" and "can't be used outside of combat" effects have always confused me. RAW, you can't use them outside of combat, but that raises some questions.
How is a monk, especially a monk with a Vow of Peace, supposed to learn and practice the style feats?
...thinking about it, the way you could do this also answers the original question of the thread- how to use the ability when enemies are not around?
Answer- Throw a punch at the fighter. Have him throw punches at you. IE- a sparring match. It is a fairly important part of learning any martial art.
Not sure if this is always useful, but it certainly presents an answer. If you find that the ability would still be useful in the dozen or so rounds that you two flail at each other, then feel free.
Obviously, no one should use enhancements or power attack, since putting nonlethal damage on yourselves is probably not very conducive to....whatever it is you are doing.
Now, it has been suggested that you use a practice dummy (and realistically that might work), but it might not exactly work in game (since objects rarely make good opponents.... unless the wizard has animate object). The spar at least has some cost (you get a small bit of nonlethal damage)
Now see that raises another interesting point, when does combat end? Certainly the answer can be rather obvious against enemies. Combat ends when you defeat all of them. But what about a friendly sparring match, say one that is as much or more about yelling friendly insults in between punches? What about against the training dummy? How long does posturing have to go on before combat ends? What about an enemy that keeps running away(in whatever manor) and then strikes in a few turns. Does combat end each time he runs away or when you finally defeat him for good?
Combat ends once you break out of initiative turn taking. As long as you're doing initiative turns your in combat, if you're not then it's not.
Combat ends once you break out of initiative turn taking. As long as you're doing initiative turns your in combat, if you're not then it's not.
So you could really juggle that around to make combat last quite a long time huh?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now see that raises another interesting point, when does combat end? Certainly the answer can be rather obvious against enemies. Combat ends when you defeat all of them. But what about a friendly sparring match, say one that is as much or more about yelling friendly insults in between punches? What about against the training dummy? How long does posturing have to go on before combat ends? What about an enemy that keeps running away(in whatever manor) and then strikes in a few turns. Does combat end each time he runs away or when you finally defeat him for good?
I guess when both sides (and sometimes either- 1 sided things eventually just become torture) stops taking offensive actions (and I don't mean 'your mom' jokes or hand gestures).
For example, real battles against enemies might end with the enemies fleeing. If you pursue, and continue to launch attacks at them, then the fight is still going on. But if they get away/you let them flee, then the fight ends, since there is no one left to fight.
Of course, that doesn't mean they don't come back 5 minutes later with an ambush after they buffed properly. But that would be a different fight, at least rules wise.
Now a spar would end when you guys stop throwing punches. Technically.... you could both throw a punch at each other and then use a move action walking to continue the 'fight'...but this would get silly quickly. Also, the nonlethal damage would eventually take its toll, even without power attack or bonuses. I guess 2 invulnerable barbarians could theorically do it (they get double DR against nonlethal). It would eventually just devolve into two over-sized kids slapping each other until the paladin tells them that he will turn this party around and leave the dungeon HE SWEARS TO GODS!
Now see that raises another interesting point, when does combat end? Certainly the answer can be rather obvious against enemies. Combat ends when you defeat all of them. But what about a friendly sparring match, say one that is as much or more about yelling friendly insults in between punches? What about against the training dummy? How long does posturing have to go on before combat ends? What about an enemy that keeps running away(in whatever manor) and then strikes in a few turns. Does combat end each time he runs away or when you finally defeat him for good?I guess when both sides (and sometimes either- 1 sided things eventually just become torture) stops taking offensive actions (and I don't mean 'your mom' jokes or hand gestures).
For example, real battles against enemies might end with the enemies fleeing. If you pursue, and continue to launch attacks at them, then the fight is still going on. But if they get away/you let them flee, then the fight ends, since there is no one left to fight.
Of course, that doesn't mean they don't come back 5 minutes later with an ambush after they buffed properly. But that would be a different fight, at least rules wise.
Now a spar would end when you guys stop throwing punches. Technically.... you could both throw a punch at each other and then use a move action walking to continue the 'fight'...but this would get silly quickly. Also, the nonlethal damage would eventually take its toll, even without power attack or bonuses. I guess 2 invulnerable barbarians could theorically do it (they get double DR against nonlethal). It would eventually just devolve into two over-sized kids slapping each other until the paladin tells them that he will turn this party around and leave the dungeon HE SWEARS TO GODS!
Hahaha I love it.
And thinking about the paladin:
There are reasons why things like smite evil have a limit of 'until dead or until the next time you rest', even when they are single target and that single target tends to die VERY quickly after said ability is used.
These abilities acknowledge circumstances such as the cowardly villain fleeing (or trying to backstab you after you let them flee) and build it so they can reach beyond them- which seems to mean that 'until the battle end' abilities do not do the same.
And now, on an unrelated note- I kind of like the idea of a paladin in a party with (or more accurately- babysitting) two childish barbarians (we have to make the barbarians brothers here, because it works with the dynamic I've set up, and they can be a bad influence on each other). Overall, we have good potential for a sitcom here. Any suggestions for names?
Think we should throw in a kleptomaniac rogue and a wizard that is too trigger happy to round things off? A hippy druid that goes 'au natural' at the worst of times? Maybe a young, innocent cleric that the paladin tries to keep from learning bad habits from the others?
And thinking about the paladin:
There are reasons why things like smite evil have a limit of 'until dead or until the next time you rest', even when they are single target and that single target tends to die VERY quickly after said ability is used.
These abilities acknowledge circumstances such as the cowardly villain fleeing (or trying to backstab you after you let them flee) and build it so they can reach beyond them- which seems to mean that 'until the battle end' abilities do not do the same.
And now, on an unrelated note- I kind of like the idea of a paladin in a party with (or more accurately- babysitting) two childish barbarians (we have to make the barbarians brothers here, because it works with the dynamic I've set up, and they can be a bad influence on each other). Overall, we have good potential for a sitcom here. Any suggestions for names?
Think we should throw in a kleptomaniac rogue and a wizard that is too trigger happy to round things off? A hippy druid that goes 'au natural' at the worst of times? Maybe a young, innocent cleric that the paladin tries to keep from learning bad habits from the others?
Make the rogue a bard and you could call it "Kur, Nur, and the Magic Men".
Make the rogue a bard and you could call it "Kur, Nur, and the Magic Men".
Hmm... and make the barbarians extremely superstitious and think magic is for girly men.... and then have one realizes he is actually a blood rager. DRAMABLEM!
|
Now I'm imagining an inquisitor carrying a dummy into a dungeon and punching it every few seconds just so they can keep a judgment going.
The inquisitor judgments require one or more foes, a training dummy isn't a foe.
Starting at 1st level, an inquisitor can pronounce judgment upon her foes as a swift action.
I feel like this is something clear for every GM in a "you know it when you see it" sort of way. You know if the PC is in combat or not. If he is not in combat the ability doesn't work, and it ends when they cease to be in comabt.
I don't think this really needs to be more than nebulously defined.
Now I'm imagining an inquisitor carrying a dummy into a dungeon and punching it every few seconds just so they can keep a judgment going.
The inquisitor judgments require one or more foes, a training dummy isn't a foe.
Starting at 1st level, an inquisitor can pronounce judgment upon her foes as a swift action.
The issue that comes up is that foe is poorly defined by RAW, if it is truly defined at all. Most of the uses of the term leave it vaguely as something you fight against.
So while all of these shenanigans can easily be taken care of by house rules, sorting out the actual rules on the matter is a bit trickier.
Its a good thing that the game has a referee to make rulings over issues like this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue that comes up is that foe is poorly defined by RAW, if it is truly defined at all. Most of the uses of the term leave it vaguely as something you fight against.
So while all of these shenanigans can easily be taken care of by house rules, sorting out the actual rules on the matter is a bit trickier.
Do we really need a definition of Foe, seriously... *despair*
Do we really need a definition of Foe, seriously... *despair*
The issue that comes up is that foe is poorly defined by RAW, if it is truly defined at all. Most of the uses of the term leave it vaguely as something you fight against.
So while all of these shenanigans can easily be taken care of by house rules, sorting out the actual rules on the matter is a bit trickier.
Several people were quite stuck on the idea that this is the rules forum and thus only RAW applies, so yes, yes we do need a definition of Foe. And no, dictionary definitions don't apply. After all, the game might have a different definition.
Its a good thing that the game has a referee to make rulings over issues like this.
The rulings of said referee are overwhelmingly house rules, and as such have limited application in this forum.