So from what i see you can use pepperbox and make unseen servant turn the barrel? So you can use 2 pepperboxes and make unseen servant spin the barrels, then reload them at the end of the round (with weapon cord or Glove of Storing of whatever - 12 free actions for all 12 barrels O_O)
I know that "you" will not allow this in your game, but RAW its possible?
Yes, by RAW I would agree. I would let you do it to, but those pepper boxes are expensive to replace when the enemies sunder them.
Legit :)
|
My interpretation would be that it would not work. The description of the spell indicates that it is an unthinking force, remember that it is NOT a creature, not even a construct, it is less than a mindless creature because even they can react to things around them. You tell it to do something and it does it, that is it, it is not capable of reacting to the world around it. So telling it, "turn the barrel after I fire" would not work because it would be unable to determine when you fired the barrel, it cannot react to that. It could just turn the barrel endlessly, but that would greatly impede your ability to fire the weapon.
. . .
So telling it, "turn the barrel after I fire" would not work because it would be unable to determine when you fired the barrel, it cannot react to that. It could just turn the barrel endlessly, but that would greatly impede your ability to fire the weapon.
This can be overcome by repeatedly giving the servant (servants?) multiple orders in sequence. It's up to the GM to determine how many times the character can actually instruct their unseen servant during their turn (assuming it's a free action, as speaking).
However, explicitly telling the unseen servant to "Turn this barrel 60 degrees" over and over, rather than asking it to repeat its actions, should work.
|
I think we are entering some poorly defined corner cases, where GM adjudication is generally required. The wording of Unseen servant is that it performs and action upon command, so you have to give that command at least once, and with spells if an action is not stipulated, it is generally the case that a standard action is required to interact with them, essentially paralleling this to using a command activated magic item.
So giving the servant a command may consume one standard action, but unseen servant keeps performing an action until told to do otherwise (if relevant, it cant keep opening a door once open, but you could set it up to mop the floor and it would just keep mopping.)
So say you give it the command round one "turn this crank every time I pull the trigger" In game terms that would mean to me that the unseen servant readies an action to turn the crank, and when you fire, it does that, and is refocused just before you, where it on the next turn readies to perform that action. (This is hand-waving that if you move it can't move after you until its next turn.) So in this scenario, the best it could do is turn the crank once per turn.
If you gave it the command "keep turning the crank" and you didn't move, then sure it could just sit there cranking the crank, but I would as GM probably adjudicate that something tugging on your crank arm would impose some sort of penalty on aiming as you wouldn't be free to move the gun without impediment of the mystery force, and it might be actively turning while you are pulling the trigger impacting your fire. Unfortunately their is nothing but fiat here when it comes to penalties, maybe treat you as if you are in a grapple?
Mechanically I don't get what the difference is, you are reducing the number of free actions you are taking I suppose? You still need a lot of iterative attacks don't you? All a pepper box is is a crude revolver without an auto-forward mechanism?
The servant reapeats the action yu gave him over and over if you dont give him any other commands. So if you give him the command to turn the barrel when i fire he will continue doing that
As addressed by The Crazy Alchemist, this would imply the servant knows when to actually pause and stop. The servant can interpret no such stimulus, as it is mindless. This can directly interfere with the shooter's aim and ability to fire, as they'd have a servant continuously trying to turn the barrel.
|
The servant reapeats the action yu gave him over and over if you dont give him any other commands. So if you give him the command to turn the barrel when i fire he will continue doing thatAs addressed by The Crazy Alchemist, this would imply the servant knows when to actually pause and stop. The servant can interpret no such stimulus, as it is mindless. This can directly interfere with the shooter's aim and ability to fire, as they'd have a servant continuously trying to turn the barrel.
And refuted by master of shadows. A servant "wouldnt know how a closed door looks like or when something is clean". It would be silly to take that limitations and to apply them to everything.
"Clean" for instance is a very subjective adjetive, this seems to imply the adjudications of actions are conducted by the spellcaster.
|
|
By your logic, the unseen servant would be a completely useless spell because the unthinking force would not be able to interpret your commands. "Open the door for me" would fail because the servant doesn't know what a door is, or what the word open means.
The spell specifically states that it follows your commands. So by the rule of specific vs general, the specific ruling of the spell understanding your commands overrules it's inability to react to outside stimuli. However that is ALL it can react to as that is all that is stated, anything further is GM call.
In your example of "Open the Door" the force would open the door and continue trying to open the door. It would be unable to determine whether the door was open or not already and therefore continue trying to open the door. If someone else were to close it the servant would immediately open it and continue keeping it open until told to do otherwise.|
|
By your logic, the unseen servant would be a completely useless spell because the unthinking force would not be able to interpret your commands. "Open the door for me" would fail because the servant doesn't know what a door is, or what the word open means.
The spell specifically states that it follows your commands. So by the rule of specific vs general, the specific ruling of the spell understanding your commands overrules it's inability to react to outside stimuli. However that is ALL it can react to as that is all that is stated, anything further is GM call.
In your example of "Open the Door" the force would open the door and continue trying to open the door. It would be unable to determine whether the door was open or not already and therefore continue trying to open the door. If someone else were to close it the servant would immediately open it and continue keeping it open until told to do otherwise.
This would also mean the servant doesnt know what a closed door is like. I mean... its not written in the spell!
|
|
"Clean" for instance is a very subjective adjetive, this seems to imply the adjudications of actions are conducted by the spellcaster.
You are correct. The force will always interpret it's instructions correctly because it is not the one interpreting them. The caster is. However, the caster is not able to dictate how the force would react to an outside stimulus because, as nothing but a force, it not able to. In your example of telling it to "Clean" the force would clean exactly where you intended it to clean but could not be told to clean something only when it becomes dirty as it is unable to determine if something needs cleaning for not. it will simple clean the area you intended for it to clean until the spell ends or you tell it to do otherwise. Much like you could not tell it spin the barrel only after you fire it. It's a force and cannot determine if the gun has been fired or not.
Additionally, being a directed spell and not a summoned creature an action (historically a move action) will need to be used to direct to do something different.|
|
This would also mean the servant doesnt know what a closed door is like. I mean... its not written in the spell!
It doesn't know what a closed door is. It's a force. That my point. However, because it is a spell cast by the spellcaster it will interpret your orders perfectly so long as those orders don't require it to make an informed decision.
You can tell it to open the door, but you could not tell it to open the door when someone knocks becasue that would require it to make a decison as to whether or not someone had knocked.|
|
His example is more complex because it involves a conditional. You can teach an animal to do something on command, "unthinkingly," but adding a wrinkle like "Fetch the bone if and when I open the door" won't work.By your logic, the unseen servant would be a completely useless spell because the unthinking force would not be able to interpret your commands. "Open the door for me" would fail because the servant doesn't know what a door is, or what the word open means.
When I throw a stick, my dog fetches it, i don't even have to tell him, he just does it every time i throw. There fore a dog is a supremely poor example because it doesn't even require instructions to perform a simple action with a conditional.
An unseen servant is an invisible, mindless, shapeless force that performs simple tasks at your command. It can run and fetch things, open unstuck doors, and hold chairs, as well as clean and mend. The servant can perform only one activity at a time, but it repeats the same activity over and over again if told to do so as long as you remain within range. It can open only normal doors, drawers, lids, and the like. It has an effective Strength score of 2 (so it can lift 20 pounds or drag 100 pounds). It can trigger traps and such, but it can exert only 20 pounds of force, which is not enough to activate certain pressure plates and other devices. It can't perform any task that requires a skill check with a DC higher than 10 or that requires a check using a skill that can't be used untrained. This servant cannot fly, climb, or even swim (though it can walk on water). Its base speed is 15 feet.
The actions an unseen servant can take are clearly quite open ended even given the stipulation that they must be simple. "clean and mend" hmm... Well, "Clean and maintain this room" is a simple command but carrying it out requires many complex actions such as locating cleaning supplies, sweeping, dusting, and mopping, picking up objects and putting them where they belong. No one of these activities would require a skill check with any DC at all let alone DC 10, and yet My own children, (who are extremely intelligent) have trouble following it. Yet for some reason I've never encountered a GM who would say that command is too difficult for an Unseen Servant. Sewing torn garments is exceptionally complex, but the servant can be commanded to mend? Why then is "Turn the barrel everytime I pull the trigger," a simple clear and concise instruction, somehow impossible for an unseen servant? The only answer I've heard so far is:
Well... because balance?
Nonsense, its the GM's job to impose balance through the actions of his NPC's, not to tell his PC's "you can't have fun because balance..." The game clearly gives you other avenues to seek balance than "NO because I'm bad at thinking of creative solutions to counter your creative solutions". Try Sunder, Disarm, Trip, Grapple or Dispel Magic. Take into account the fact that your PC is going to have one round of ridiculousness before the NPC's figure out whats going on and put a stop to it. Then beef up your encounter accordingly and for gods sake if that means your party is advancing too fast, drop them down a tier on the xp chart.
TLDR: The counter to creative thinking is more creative thinking. It is not the dismissal of ideas because they are too good.
One can simply omit the command to repeat the same action over and over. Hence my suggestion to use multiple sequential commands, limited only by the GM's decision on how many speaking free actions you can take in a round.
A servant ordered to "Clean" may do so. A servant asked to whittle a spoon, should be able to stop once its task is complete. It seems up to the GM beyond that.
I'll retract my last post and add that I'm particularly fond of the "incapable of abstract thought" interpretation... Able to obey by perception, but not ideas like measurements, IF/then statements or other logic.
EDIT:
When I throw a stick, my dog fetches it, i don't even have to tell him, he just does it every time i throw. There fore a dog is a supremely poor example because it doesn't even require instructions to perform a simple action with a conditional.
Do keep in mind that a dog is not mindless. Nor are your children (hopefully).
|
|
I'm still stymied on balance here, other then being kind of a silly thing, how does this impact balance? The rotation of the barrel is a free action, your basically exchanging one mechanism to rotate the barrel for another, it doesn't give you more shots? That is your BAB, rapid and shot. The issue seems to be one of reloading more then anything when it comes to stretching credibility no?
This would allow you to rotate the barrel without having a free hand. It's not a matter or reloading; it's one of unloading multiple rounds, possibly taking two weapon fighting, so long as you have an Unseen Servant at your side.
Mechanically, Revolvers are more expensive, and advanced. This is more like bringing revolvers into a setting that wouldn't normally allow them without claiming they're incredibly rare.
Well in the worse case you can just say "hold the barrel" and then turn the firearm body around it.
Anyway, it seems fun to have possessed guns, but weapon cord was errataed to move action so most one can make of it now is full round all-guns-blazing once in 2 rounds. That if they dont misfire, it is.
Mechanically, Revolvers are more expensive, and advanced. This is more like bringing revolvers into a setting that wouldn't normally allow them without claiming they're incredibly rare.
Revolvers are too modern, i just want guns that possessed by spirit and work on magic XD
|
|
I'm still stymied on balance here, other then being kind of a silly thing, how does this impact balance? The rotation of the barrel is a free action, your basically exchanging one mechanism to rotate the barrel for another, it doesn't give you more shots? That is your BAB, rapid and shot. The issue seems to be one of reloading more then anything when it comes to stretching credibility no?
Agreed, I am not a big fan of GM's allowing their players 20 free actions per round to reload their guns. But that's a completely different argument. My only real issue is that I simply do not believe that this usage is within this spells capabilities. It's like allowing a fireball spell to light an enemy on fire. Is it particularly overbalanced? No. Is it something the spell is able to do. Also No. Is it something a GM could do if he wanted so long as he knows that he is defying RAW. Sure why not, those sorts of creative decisions make this game great.
But the OP specifically was looking for RAW answers not "would you, as a GM, allow this"
This is realy all open to interpretation on what the spell Unseen Servant is allowed to do.
Personally I prefer to interpret spells in a restrictive (rather than permissive manner) to limit the power difference between casters and non-caster. It may not help much, but being too permissive with what spells can do only makes the difference worse. With that being said I look at these two lines:
An unseen servant is an invisible, mindless, shapeless force that performs simple tasks at your command. It can run and fetch things, open unstuck doors, and hold chairs, as well as clean and mend.
I look at the first line and consider it fluff, a flavorful description of what the Unseen Servant can do. Then I look at the next sentence, and if we considered this the summaiton of things it can do it actually provides an easy response to the quesiton. So, I'm going to choose to look at this second sentence as the restricted list of abilities the Unseen Servant is capable of performing.
It can fetch items, open doors (that aren't stuck or have otherwise impaired movement), hold chairs (not sure this is important but okay), and clean and mend things. As turning a barrel of a pepperbox isn't one of these it is not something an Unseen Servant is capable of doing.
@That Crazy Alchemist: That being said, it's also worth noting that the Gm's call on how many free actions can be performed in a round is Also part of the RAW.
Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally. However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free, as decided by the GM.
|
|
That being said, it's also worth noting that the Gm's call on how many free actions can be performed in a round is Also part of the RAW.
Precisely, this is why I hate it when I hear GM's whine about how the gunslinger in their group is swiss cheezing every encounter by lowering the oxygen to lead ratio in the air. It's their own fault for letting them take 20 free actions in one round to reload a gun.
|
|
I'm still stymied on balance here, other then being kind of a silly thing, how does this impact balance? The rotation of the barrel is a free action, your basically exchanging one mechanism to rotate the barrel for another, it doesn't give you more shots? That is your BAB, rapid and shot. The issue seems to be one of reloading more then anything when it comes to stretching credibility no?Agreed, I am not a big fan of GM's allowing their players 20 free actions per round to reload their guns. But that's a completely different argument. My only real issue is that I simply do not believe that this usage is within this spells capabilities. It's like allowing a fireball spell to light an enemy on fire. Is it particularly overbalanced? No. Is it something the spell is able to do. Also No. Is it something a GM could do if he wanted so long as he knows that he is defying RAW. Sure why not, those sorts of creative decisions make this game great.
But the OP specifically was looking for RAW answers not "would you, as a GM, allow this"
I actually wrote, what I presumptuously thought was, a decent post on why I agree that this isn't an appropriate use of the spell, but as I was ignored, I'm trying to grasp why, which people did explain, although I don't recall the pepperbox requiring a free hand to rotate the breach(?).
|
|
I actually wrote, what I presumptuously thought was, a decent post on why I agree that this isn't an appropriate use of the spell, but as I was ignored, I'm trying to grasp why, which people did explain, although I don't recall the pepperbox requiring a free hand to rotate the breach(?).
You weren't ignored, I read it.
"This pistol has six barrels instead of one. The entire barrel housing can be quickly rotated by hand between shots (a free action requiring one free hand), allowing all six bullets to be fired before the weapon must be reloaded. Each barrel of a pepperbox uses either a bullet and a single dose of black powder or a single alchemical cartridge as ammunition."
The OP is trying to dual weld pepperboxes which can't be done without cheesy tricks. I am explaining why this trick does not work to the OP and others who believe this 1st level spell can do more than it says it can.
Remember also that there is a limit to how many free actions one can perform in a round. That limit is fuzzy and left for interpretation by the GM/group, but it is defined as "a reasonable amount" per the devs (see the FAQ).
So a part of RAW in this case requires a GM or group decision.
|
|
I am explaining why this trick does not work to the OP and others who believe this 1st level spell can do more than it says it can.
Here is the problem, would you say that an unseen servant is capable of more than the few actions listed in the second sentance of the spell description?
Yes, almost everyone would, and the spell description itself says you can later in the paragraph. The only real restriction is the skill DC, and 20lbs of force.Only one guy so far has argued otherwise, and he clearly stopped reading the spell after 2 sentances.
Would it then be within the power of the unseen servant spell to give it the following command: "Stand here, and when ever the door is opened, close it"?
If so, then our pepper box dual wielder can in fact command his unseen servant to rotate the barrels after each trigger pull. The command syntax is functionally the same: "Stand here, and whenever the trigger is pulled, rotate the barrel." The task is no more or less complex.
So then the only legitimate argument to the contrary is this one:
"I went to an antique store and bought a pepperbox that has been maintained by an enthusiast as if it were new, I then took it to my lab and with sophisticated instrumentation, I measured the amount of force required to rotate the barrels, it's over 20lbs, so unfortunately your unseen servant can't do it."
|
|
...Would it then be within the power of the unseen servant spell to give it the following command: "Stand here, and when ever the door is opened, close it"?
If so, then our pepper box dual wielder can in fact command his unseen servant to rotate the barrels after each trigger pull. The command syntax is functionally the same: "Stand here, and whenever the trigger is pulled, rotate the barrel." The task is no more or less complex.
That is NOT within the power of the unseen servant to be given the command of "Stand here, and whenever the door is opened, close it?" I think I actually used an example much like that one above. It's not the complexity of the task, it's the requirement that the unseen servant must be able to react to outside stimuli in order to be able to accomplish the task. If any one of the examples given in the spell required any amount of reaction on the servants part I might agree with you. But it does not. Therefore the servant is unable, by RAW, to perform tasks that require it to react to any stimuli other than the casters commands.
While I do not take as... imposing a stance as Master of Shadows, I do retract one of my previous statements. Here's why.
The only reliable ways to justify it, as far as I can see, would be as follows:
1) To read the spell description as restrictively and literally as Claxon would, or
2) To compare it to other known "mindless" things
I vaguely recall in my adventures several examples of a golem that could be ordered to "guard" an area. A Shield Guardian golem can guard an amulet wearer from incoming attacks. This justifies to me that this spell can be used for simpler IF/then statements.
Reasoning, higher brain function, measurements, or anything not directly reliant on perception and a simple command, seem out of the question though.
Still this is all supposition. Still looking for any mindless-related FAQ or thread with an official answer. For now, there's the Shield Guardian.
|
|
That is NOT within the power of the unseen servant to be given the command of "Stand here, and whenever the door is opened, close it?" I think I actually used an example much like that one above. It's not the complexity of the task, it's the requirement that the unseen servant must be able to react to outside stimuli in order to be able to accomplish the task. If any one of the examples given in the spell required any amount of reaction on the servants part I might agree with you. But it does not. Therefore the servant is unable, by RAW, to perform tasks that require it to react to any stimuli other than the casters commands.
...Would it then be within the power of the unseen servant spell to give it the following command: "Stand here, and when ever the door is opened, close it"?
If so, then our pepper box dual wielder can in fact command his unseen servant to rotate the barrels after each trigger pull. The command syntax is functionally the same: "Stand here, and whenever the trigger is pulled, rotate the barrel." The task is no more or less complex.
To which I rebutted that the your logic has no merit because following any commands at all implies at least that much ability to reason despite the qualifier "Mindless".
It is implied in the spell that the caster's intent is the content of the command that matters, because if it were not, then a mindless shapeless force would be incapable of taking any action at all. a mindless force is not capable of the word association necessary to perform even simple tasks, yet the spell exists and functions regardless so where does that ability come from? It doesn't come from the Force, it comes from the caster, in the form of a command.
This is why I hate implicitness in rules, it leaves too much open to interpretation.
|
|
While I do not take as... imposing a stance as Master of Shadows, I do retract one of my previous statements. Here's why.
The only reliable ways to justify it, as far as I can see, would be as follows:
1) To read the spell description as restrictively and literally as Claxon would, or
2) To compare it to other known "mindless" thingsI vaguely recall in my adventures several examples of a golem that could be ordered to "guard" an area. A Shield Guardian golem can guard an amulet wearer from incoming attacks. This justifies to me that this spell can be used for simpler IF/then statements.
Reasoning, higher brain function, measurements, or anything not directly reliant on perception and a simple command, seem out of the question though.
Still this is all supposition. Still looking for any mindless-related FAQ or thread with an official answer. For now, there's the Shield Guardian.
It's important to note that this is not a mindless creature. It is not a creature at all. It is a force, no different than any other spell of yours which is why it doesn't have an initiative of its own. It is simply a spell effect and nothing more.
|
|
To which I rebutted that the your logic has no merit because following any commands at all implies at least that much ability to reason despite the qualifier "Mindless".It is implied in the spell that the caster's intent is the content of the command that matters, because if it were not, then a mindless shapeless force would be incapable of taking any action at all. a mindless force is not capable of the word association necessary to perform even simple tasks, yet the spell exists and functions regardless so where does that ability come from? It doesn't come from the Force, it comes from the caster, in the form of a command.
This is why I hate implicitness in rules, it leaves too much open to interpretation.
It has the same amount of "ability to reason" as a Flaming Sphere spell. The caster directs it and it reacts to the casters commands within the spells perimeters. An Unseen Servant is no more capable of performing an act requiring a conscious decision as a flaming sphere is.
But I agree, implicitness in rules sucks...
Here is the problem, would you say that an unseen servant is capable of more than the few actions listed in the second sentance of the spell description?Yes, almost everyone would, and the spell description itself says you can later in the paragraph. The only real restriction is the skill DC, and 20lbs of force.Only one guy so far has argued otherwise, and he clearly stopped reading the spell after 2 sentances.
No. You shouldn't make assumptions about what I did and didn't do. I read the whole spell, but I was looking for text within it that creates a limitation on what an Unseen Servant can and cannot do to justify forbidding the action, as that appeared to be the question. Sure the spell goes on to say other things, but it never actually invalidates the list of actions it is allowed to perform and honestly the spell is largely left up to the discretion of the GM as to what it can and can't perform.
The honest truth is that there isn't a clear reason within the spell as to why an Unseen Servant can't do this, but it certainly isn't within the intention of the spell to allow you to dual wield Pepperboxes and allow you to make multiple shots every round with each one. That is beyond what a 1st level spell should enable you to do. There is really no argument other than game balance here (in my opinion). If I were the GM and a player tried to do this I'd damn well tell them no. I wouldn't try to justify it with the text of the spell or anything else I would simply tell them that in my opinion these items/spells were not intended to be combined in such a way to provide such a huge power increase to player as what is being suggested by using this first level spell. Especially when you comapre it to the existant Revolver which is essentially what a pepperbox becomes with the Unseen Servant idea. The revovler is an advanced firearm that is incredibly expensive by comparison, and allowing the use of a level 1 spell that last hours per level to effectively replicate that just sholdn't happen.
It can open only normal doors, drawers, lids, and the like. It has an effective Strength score of 2 (so it can lift 20 pounds or drag 100 pounds).
Dont make me go into stupid things like attaching miniature drawers to every barrel. It can exert force of 20lbs to "lift" the barrel.
Don't make me discuss again how this is outside of the scope of what a 1st level spell should be able to accomplish.
Claxon's point is strong. In almost any matter of obscurity in the rules, from item creation to spells to feats, the final judgement tends to revolve around balance. And it seems way out of the limits for a level 1 spell to perform in this way.
Also, That Crazy Alchemist, it Is an actual thing , not merely a spell effect. Creation. Check out the rest of the thread, too, awesome points made. ^_^
...it seems only the issue of its ability to receive and perform commands is in question. And, again, for that Claxon has the one approach... The other would be to see what a "mindless" entity can do.
Scope does not matter, we seek RAW no matter how overpowered/underpowered it may be. Silent Image is 1st level spell, cast it over a pit and 20lvl fighter fall into lava to the death. Power is subjective.
And prehencile hair/tail can do it, wich is like 1st level hex or trait.
|
|
The honest truth is that there isn't a clear reason within the spell as to why an Unseen Servant can't do this, but it certainly isn't within the intention of the spell to allow you to dual wield Pepperboxes and allow you to make multiple shots every round with each one. That is beyond what a 1st level spell should enable you to do. There is really no argument other than game balance here (in my opinion). If I were the GM and a player tried to do this I'd damn well tell them no. I wouldn't try to justify it with the text of the spell or anything else I would simply tell them that in my opinion these items/spells were not intended to be combined in such a way to provide such a huge power increase to player as what is being suggested by using this first level spell. Especially when you comapre it to the existant Revolver which is essentially what a pepperbox becomes with the Unseen Servant idea. The revovler is an advanced firearm that is incredibly expensive by comparison, and allowing the use of a level 1 spell that last hours per level to effectively replicate that...
Objection! Asked and Answered
The counter to creative thinking is more creative thinking. It is not the dismissal of ideas because they are too good.
Sustained
The defense rests...
|
|
Scope does not matter, we seek RAW no matter how overpowered/underpowered it may be. Silent Image is 1st level spell, cast it over a pit and 20lvl fighter fall into lava to the death. Power is subjective.
And prehencile hair/tail can do it, wich is like 1st level hex or trait.
Just need to point out that by RAW Prehensile Tail nor Prehensile Hair would allow you to do this either. Hair says it cannot manipulate weapons and Tail says it is only capable of carrying or retrieving stowed items.
Just need to put that out there since this thread is entirely based on RAW.
|
|
Well, you bring up a good point, its defined as mindless and shapeless, but then:
This servant cannot fly, climb, or even swim (though it can walk on water). Its base speed is 15 feet.
It can, really? I thought it was mindless and shapeless, if so, how does it walk? On water or otherwise, legs are a prerequisite of walking. But if it has legs, why not hands? How can it be shapeless and have legs? Its a contradiction.
|
|
Weird. I would say the answer is no, but that's because I would treat it like a summoned creature with it's own turn in initiative. Seeing as that hasn't come up in the argument, though, I think I'm making an assumption no one else is...
If that were the case, it would simply refocus its initiative to match and take its free actions concurrently with your turn. That might slow you down by 1 whole round, but that's pretty negligible.
Heh. I deleted my post, having not read That Crazy Alchemist's fully, regarding the prehensile hair. ^_^;; Hoped nobody caught that...
Anyways, you're right. It absolutely is a contradiction. The other thread linked to goes into a bunch of physical detail, like figuring out that, whatever it is, it's Medium sized. It seems most obvious to me though, that that's the way they chose to establish a ground-based movement. Apparently a shapeless thing walks.
In my mind, It's a contradiction that something is "mindless" and capable doing any skill that doesn't require a roll higher than 10. But nothing in the spell explicitly restricts it from, say, crafting a metal pot or simple clothes, or foraging food for one person out in the jungle.
I take it you would condone those uses?
|
|
As long as they do not require in excess of 20lbs of force sure(I suspect that crafting a pot from ingots would require much more force than a mere 20lbs). Clearly the caster has something specific in mind when the command is issued, as long as all the materials/tools are to hand and the caster himself has a reasonable understanding of the processes involved, then it sure could.
Scope does not matter, we seek RAW no matter how overpowered/underpowered it may be. Silent Image is 1st level spell, cast it over a pit and 20lvl fighter fall into lava to the death. Power is subjective.
And prehencile hair/tail can do it, wich is like 1st level hex or trait.
Just need to point out that by RAW Prehensile Tail nor Prehensile Hair would allow you to do this either. Hair says it cannot manipulate weapons and Tail says it is only capable of carrying or retrieving stowed items.
Just need to put that out there since this thread is entirely based on RAW.
You hand the weapon off for your hair/tail to hold it as an item, then use your now free hand to rotate the barrel as a free action, then hadn the item back to your hand.
You hand the weapon off for your hair/tail to hold it as an item, then use your now free hand to rotate the barrel as a free action, then hadn the item back to your hand.
Unfortunately why I deleted my post. Neither action is possible. CBP's point is fairly valid too.
Also, in regards to the Unseen Servant's other uses... I have nothing else to contribute to the matter. Will do a little more research. Seems like there'd be more controversy than what I've found thus far.
|
It would vary Gm to Gm. Free actions, RAW, are Gm discretion by their very nature. So RAW, it both can and can't be done. Paizo Will never, and can never specifically define free actions that much. From my personal perspective, 12 free actions is way too many for a 6 second segment that also includes your normal allotment of actions.