Battlemind Link

[Charon's Little Helper]

How the heck would this spell work? I know the rules - but the line "You and the ally each roll initiative in combat and use the higher die result before adding modifiers" seems screwy.

How would you prove that the character that goes first would get the benefit? What if they kill the target before the second one goes?

Frankly - it seems that the bolded section above should have been "after adding modifiers" and the whole thing would work rather nicely. That's the way I'd houserule it - but what if I want to try it in PFS?

In addition - what if one of the two allies has more attacks than the other? Does he only benefit from the extra d20 for as many attacks as their ally makes?

It seems really cool - just awkward and badly written.

[Chess Pwn]

What are you asking? Initiative is rolled only at the start of combat, and you both get to use the higher die roll as your roll.

I have a +10 initiative and I rolled a 2

My buddy has a +1 but rolled a 15

My init is 25 because I use his higher roll. His is 16 because he uses his higher roll.

[Adept_Woodwright]

If it assigned the highest initiative after modifiers, both battlemind linked characters would act on the same initiative (maybe not a bad house rule, but this would possibly be a significant change)

Essentially, this aspect of the spell allows the linked characters to share the die result of "roll twice, take the highest". In initiative, and when both characters focus on one creature for attacks.

I'll agree that it is awkwardly written, however. The three abilities in addition to the initiative roll are not well defined, and do not follow from the initiative aspect as the description implies.

As I read it, so long as the linked buddy attacked a target with a given method in his previous turn, you will roll twice and take highest so long as you use the same method. You can either create an ordered pool of results for your buddy in the next round, or you can just roll twice take highest for every appropriate attack.

Is this helpful?

[shroudb]

Its the highest rolled number for INITIATIVE not for everything (I guess you thought the latter since you mention attacks and whatnot)

[Charon's Little Helper]

I'm not asking about the Initiative part of the spell. I'm asking about the rest of it. I just think that the wording about the initiative is the crux of the problem - because you aren't both going at the same time.

[Chess Pwn]

The faster person can always delay to the slower person's turn. But the two rolls makes it so the slower person has a better chance at getting a good roll.

[Barachiel Shina]

According to the spell, the only way two characters could legitimately dedicate their attacks to the same enemy is one would have to ready an action for the other.

Also, what if the character that didn't have to Ready Action gets a full attack. Will they make all rolls twice or only roll twice for attacks that happen at the same time as the other? This spell can also be interpreted as only one of the characters getting the benefit while the other is simply providing the prerequisite.

We have had one errata on UM and this one still isn't clarified/fixed. Paizo needs to get the ball rolling already.

[Zenogu]

Still waiting on a response for this as well. My Magus is actually debating on picking this up from an Arcana. I can see what the spell is trying to do, but it fumbles alot with how the game actually works.

Can someone Gate in Jason Bulmahn?

[Barachiel Shina]

For now, I told one of my players planning on a future Inquisitor that someone would have to ready an action with the ally. And it only works on an attack/attack basis.

For example, you attack and ally attacks, both get the benefit, but if ally attacks with a Readied Action and other ally full attacks, only the first attack in the full attack gets the benefit and not the rest, since the spell specifically says when BOTH attack.

I do count AoO, from situations like the Paired Opportunists feat, as well since its also simultaneous.

[shroudb]

i play it like that:

let's say an inquisitor with 2 attacks uses it on a barbarian with 3 attacks:

inquisitor has higher init modifier so he plays first:
he is going to attack a target, barbarian (in a position that he is able to do so) declares that he is also attacking the same target.

1st attack, he rolls a 7, the barbarian also rolls, and he gets a 15
so 1st attack locked to a 15
2nd attack, he rolls a 17 and the barbarian rolls an 8
so 2nd attack locked on a 17
inquistor's turn ends

barb's round starts later in the same turn:
he has already declared that he is attacking the previous target.
if he has to move to attack, he gets an "auto" 15 on his attack (the 1st locked attack number from their shared pool)
if he can full attack he gets:
15 for 1st
17 for second
he has to roll for the third attack

if the target is dead, he CANNOT attack another target (he has already declared his action, similar to readying an action)

and etc

but yeah, it's wonky

[IIXHiMXII]

bump

[Zenogu]

FAQ'ed

[the Lorax]

Yeah, it's been FAQ'd before - I don't believe it has ever been answered fully - as written, the only way it works is with readied actions and then doing simultaneous resolution of action.

I have had a player say something like "This looks really cool in theory, but I don't see how it can work mechanically in reality, so I'll just ignore its existance."