Does Sleep make you Prone? + Do you drop held items?


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 209 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Wait, wait, wait.

Some people are here saying that when you get hit with sleep magic, you must fall prone and drop things because it makes sense from a simulationist perspective.

Fine. I agree.

But RAW doesn't say that, and this is a Rules Questions forum.

I've had people on this forum tell me that mithral shirts cost essentially the same for pixies as they do for titans (because it's a gamist mechanical benefit that does the same thing for a pixie and for a titan so it should cost the exactly same gp, at least for the mithral part of the cost). That's crazy, but it's RAW and it makes gamist sense.

Where are those people now? Shouldn't they be here saying that sleep magics (spells, hexes, etc.) should not give extra mechanical penalties beyond what the RAW says? Being asleep is bad enough, but if the victim survives it, must he also lose additional actions after the sleep effect ends? Actions to retrieve dropped items, an action to stand up.

Is it fair to suffer the penalties of being asleep for X rounds and then have to suffer the additional loss of actions?

Maybe. Maybe that's what the devs intended. Or, maybe, that's causing further loss of actions to the target and causing these sleep effects to be overpowered.

Option 1: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He loses one round while he stands there, nodding off, his head in a fuzzy state drifting on the edge of dreamland. After one round, he shakes it off and gets back into the fight.

Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

So with option 1, the target gets exactly what the spell says: 1 round of sleep.

But with option 2, the poor schmuck gets way, way more than the spell says: 1 round of sleep, another round wasted, a third round limited, and three AoOs. By that example, a 1 round slumber seems VERY overpowered if we assume the target must fall prone and drop stuff.

Now, every simulationist on these forums will argue that option 2 is correct. But where are the forum's gamists, why aren't they here to argue that option 1 is correct? Surely option 1 is no less preposterous than paying the exact same price for a wagonload of mithral that you pay for a handful of mithral?

Me, I'm a die-hard, unrepentant simulationist, but I also believe in game balance, so I find myself somewhat on the fence on this one. My simulationist self says I must do option 2 but my keep-it-balanced self says that maybe the gamists are right (wherever they are).

In any case, I can definitely see both arguments equally.

Dark Archive

I was trying to find the exact post, but alas I failed my perception check.

But I took a screen shot of something James Jacobs posted to show some friends, so I will repeat what he said.

"Nowhere do the rules state that if you fall unconscious or die do you fall prone.

Sometimes, we don't bother putting rules in because hopefully the answers are obvious.

AKA: If you don't sleep, you become fatigued."

That was his exact post. I think this falls into the obvious common sense thing here.


Soooooo many options. Here's some of them:

What if the Sleep spell said

Spoiler:
"Targets fall into a sleeplike state, their minds drifting on the edge of sleep"? Would you still INSIST that they must fall prone and drop stuff, even if the spell doesn't say they must?

Probably not.

It doesn't say that, but what if that was the intent all along, to keep the victims standing?

On the other hand, what if the Sleep spell said

Spoiler:
"Targets fall asleep, spending their next action gently lying down on the ground so as not to hurt themselves, and drifting off into dreamland still clutching their weapons or any other held objects"? Now you would be certain they are prone but you probably wouldn't insist that they must drop their items.

It doesn't say that, but what if that was the intent all along, to further penalize the victims so they are prone but not disarmed?

Alternatively, what if the Sleep spell said

Spoiler:
"Targets fall asleep so quickly that they immediately fall prone, possibly injuring themselves in the process, and everything they were holding is dropped"?

Well, no questions there, except possibly whether the fall does damage and whether that might wake them up.

It doesn't say that, but what if that was the intent all along, to further penalize the victims so they are prone AND disarmed?

Or what if the Sleep spell said

Spoiler:
"Targets feel an intense, overwhelming desire to put themselves to sleep, spending their next rounds removing their armor and shoes and clothes, putting on pajamas, spreading out their bedrolls, and crawling into bed, all the while in a magically induced sleepwalking state"? Now they wake up not only disarmed, but also disarmored. Heck, I hope the victims have sleep masks (blindfolds); they might even put those on so they wake up blind, too.

It doesn't say that, but what if that was the intent all along, to further penalize the victims so they are prone, disarmed, and have no armor?

Better yet, what if the Sleep spell said

Spoiler:
"Targets hit themselves on the head repeatedly with any solid object they can find, doing non-lethal damage until they fall unconscious, at which time they fall prone and drop all held items"?

It doesn't say that, but what if that was the intent all along, to further penalize the victims so they are prone, disarmed, and have no HP?

It's pretty hard to know for sure what the "intent all along" really was. Obviously the more absurd examples are not RAI - we would definitely need more text to assume the subject wake up without their armor, blind, or with 0 HP.

But maybe the fuzzy sleeplike state isn't so absurd after all?


Hey, on the subject of sleep walking, wife (IRL) used to walk, talk, and do things while she was asleep. Her conversations were nonsense, real words but not coherent sentences, she didn't ever fall down, even sleepwalking on stairs, and sometimes she moved things around, even cooking meals (though it was more like starting to but then wandering back to bed, sometimes bringing pans with her).

So there's real-world precedent for people standing and carrying things, even while asleep.

Grand Lodge

Someone (offline) suggested it would be funny to throw a sleep walker at a PC who was fond of the sleep spell.

GM "Okay, he is asleep. On his turn, he turns and walks toward the cliff, mumbling something about sandwiches, still holding the Mcguffin."

Grand Lodge

Forgotten Knight wrote:

I was trying to find the exact post, but alas I failed my perception check.

But I took a screen shot of something James Jacobs posted to show some friends, so I will repeat what he said.

"Nowhere do the rules state that if you fall unconscious or die do you fall prone.

Sometimes, we don't bother putting rules in because hopefully the answers are obvious.

AKA: If you don't sleep, you become fatigued."

That was his exact post. I think this falls into the obvious common sense thing here.

Yes, but the developers also sometimes haven't thought things through, like whoever it was who said saddles should only be available for animals typically used for riding, not for tigers. (Tigers are listed as riding animals in the animal archive.)


"Stop! Don't you know how dangerous it is to wake a sleepwalker?"


FLite wrote:


So, GM discretion, Expect table variation. May depend on your opponent and as in the case from HoM, dramatic necessity.

So your saying that I wouldn't be able to take 10 on my perception check to wake up due to loud noises around me? Because of dramatic necessity?

Dark Archive

DM_Blake wrote:

Hey, on the subject of sleep walking, wife (IRL) used to walk, talk, and do things while she was asleep. Her conversations were nonsense, real words but not coherent sentences, she didn't ever fall down, even sleepwalking on stairs, and sometimes she moved things around, even cooking meals (though it was more like starting to but then wandering back to bed, sometimes bringing pans with her).

So there's real-world precedent for people standing and carrying things, even while asleep.

I know it is possible to sleep while standing, and also to not drop what you are holding while standing. I did it once in boot camp.

However if you ever watch any form of fighting (boxing, MMA, German Fencing) if someone gets knocked out they go down. A lot of that has to do with moving around, your bodies momentum and stuff to that effect. A character in a fight that gets put to sleep, common sense says they are gonna go down. Now the guard that is just standing there, when he gets put to sleep he may continue to stand there.

But this is just my opinion, and it would be how I handled the situation in a game I ran.

Back to the OP, let your GM make a ruling. Ultimately they have the final say.

Grand Lodge

bbangerter wrote:
FLite wrote:


So, GM discretion, Expect table variation. May depend on your opponent and as in the case from HoM, dramatic necessity.
So your saying that I wouldn't be able to take 10 on my perception check to wake up due to loud noises around me? Because of dramatic necessity?

that is a different thread :)

Grand Lodge

Forgotten Knight wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:

Hey, on the subject of sleep walking, wife (IRL) used to walk, talk, and do things while she was asleep. Her conversations were nonsense, real words but not coherent sentences, she didn't ever fall down, even sleepwalking on stairs, and sometimes she moved things around, even cooking meals (though it was more like starting to but then wandering back to bed, sometimes bringing pans with her).

So there's real-world precedent for people standing and carrying things, even while asleep.

I know it is possible to sleep while standing, and also to not drop what you are holding while standing. I did it once in boot camp.

However if you ever watch any form of fighting (boxing, MMA, German Fencing) if someone gets knocked out they go down. A lot of that has to do with moving around, your bodies momentum and stuff to that effect. A character in a fight that gets put to sleep, common sense says they are gonna go down. Now the guard that is just standing there, when he gets put to sleep he may continue to stand there.

But this is just my opinion, and it would be how I handled the situation in a game I ran.

Back to the OP, let your GM make a ruling. Ultimately they have the final say.

Psst. The OP *is* the GM. :)

knocked out due to a punch, (which takes a fair bit of force) is far different than asleep because a witch looked at you funny. But yes, as I said, it would probably be situational. Personally, I suspect I would give a PC adjacent to a vertical surface a reflex save to slump against it rather than fall to the floor. At least for a few rounds.


Is it just me, or is there no 'sleep' 'sleeping' or 'asleep' condition in the Glossary?

If so, does this imply that each sleep-causing effect is a unique status condition with its own separate clause on fluff description, action required to wake up, etc.?

I see the 'unconscious' condition in the Glossary but that one is specifically 'unconscious after taking damage'.


Echoen wrote:
Quote:

Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target).

(equivalent to attacking a prone target).

(equivalent

----------------

Seems RAW is that unconscious people do not go prone.

Oh, and I'm the GM. My mind got blown last week about how differently Charge works in Pathfinder, so I'm fully open to the concept that Paizo intends for stuff like Sleep and Slumber hex do not make the opponent fall prone.

That quote of yours is talking about helpless targets, not unconscious targets, which means it says nothing about the specifics of unconsciousness.

By the way, I take that quote to mean that a helpless target is at +4 to hit, and if it also happens to be prone while being helpless, which isn't always the case, you're still at only +4 to hit


Okay, so I know this is the rules forum, before anybody needs to remind me. But since all relevant rules have already been quoted, I thought I'd offer some gameplay anecdotes and personal opinions, since it turns out those can, in fact, be relevant to a GM trying to decide how to rule.

In the game I'm currently playing in, our psion has some kind of sleep power (psionic sleep? I don't know. It's some other player's character.). The GM ruled that psionic sleep causes you to fall asleep while standing, but that's explicitly different from magical sleep. So one option we have is that different kinds of sleep effects could manifest differently.

I, for one, would consider the duration. The slumber hex is one round per level. That's pretty short, especially at low levels. I think somebody going to sleep for one round probably would remain standing. The sleep spell, however, is one minute per level. That seems long-term enough that someone would go prone.

On the related question about dropping items, I know this diverges from RAW but I've always considered that if you go prone and drop your weapon(s), say from being dropped below 0 HP, that you can easily grab your weapon again while prone, not requiring an action or provoking an AoO. This is obviously different from being stunned or disarmed, and it's one of those ways my sense of simulationism gets in the way of interpreting rules strictly.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
FLite wrote:
Forgotten Knight wrote:

I was trying to find the exact post, but alas I failed my perception check.

But I took a screen shot of something James Jacobs posted to show some friends, so I will repeat what he said.

"Nowhere do the rules state that if you fall unconscious or die do you fall prone.

Sometimes, we don't bother putting rules in because hopefully the answers are obvious.

AKA: If you don't sleep, you become fatigued."

That was his exact post. I think this falls into the obvious common sense thing here.

Yes, but the developers also sometimes haven't thought things through, like whoever it was who said saddles should only be available for animals typically used for riding, not for tigers. (Tigers are listed as riding animals in the animal archive.)

That's covered in the catchall "exotic saddle". Maybe when you think the developers haven't thought of something its because you haven't read it all through?


DM_Blake wrote:

Wait, wait, wait.

Some people are here saying that when you get hit with sleep magic, you must fall prone and drop things because it makes sense from a simulationist perspective.

Fine. I agree.

But RAW doesn't say that, and this is a Rules Questions forum.

I've had people on this forum tell me that mithral shirts cost essentially the same for pixies as they do for titans (because it's a gamist mechanical benefit that does the same thing for a pixie and for a titan so it should cost the exactly same gp, at least for the mithral part of the cost). That's crazy, but it's RAW and it makes gamist sense.

Where are those people now? Shouldn't they be here saying that sleep magics (spells, hexes, etc.) should not give extra mechanical penalties beyond what the RAW says? Being asleep is bad enough, but if the victim survives it, must he also lose additional actions after the sleep effect ends? Actions to retrieve dropped items, an action to stand up.

Is it fair to suffer the penalties of being asleep for X rounds and then have to suffer the additional loss of actions?

Maybe. Maybe that's what the devs intended. Or, maybe, that's causing further loss of actions to the target and causing these sleep effects to be overpowered.

Option 1: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He loses one round while he stands there, nodding off, his head in a fuzzy state drifting on the edge of dreamland. After one round, he shakes it off and gets back into the fight.

Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

So with option 1, the target gets exactly what the spell says: 1 round of sleep.

But with option 2, the poor...

Option 2 is why I'm looking at this so hard. I'm GMing a Witch with a Slumber hex of DC 19 at level 3, and a feat to allow them to try it again if the enemy succeeds. While I do not wish to punish that hyper specialty, I have to keep in mind the effect on the game - enemies can no longer be interesting. If they're not coup de graced, they're rendered impotent due to falling over and dropping held items, as common sense dictates. Becoming helpless and inviting coup de grace is enough, I think, to have Slumber and Sleep effects be incredibly powerful. Adding on additional rounds of vulnerability and forced ineptitude is adding salt to the wound. I want my players to feel like every fight is interesting, every fight is unique, every enemy is fleshed out.... not a process of "Activate decerebrate for no power points" every time.


Personally, I would allow a TWFer to pick up his weapons just like he draws them—in the same action—but that's just me.


DM_Blake wrote:

Option 1: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He loses one round while he stands there, nodding off, his head in a fuzzy state drifting on the edge of dreamland. After one round, he shakes it off and gets back into the fight.

Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

So with option 1, the target gets exactly what the spell says: 1 round of sleep.

But with option 2, the poor...

Option 2 is why people believe sleep is so OPed. I see Option 1 as supported by RAW.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Personally, I would allow a TWFer to pick up his weapons just like he draws them—in the same action—but that's just me.

The problem with this solution is that it is TOTALLY against the rules. It was a situation caused by not following RAW and then you have to change a rule to have it appear as more balanced?

That to me is the main problem with people not following RAW they have to modify the next ruling to compensate or worse they complete throw out the rules and just try to appease people at the table to overcompensate for something that should have never arisen.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DM_Blake wrote:
Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

Or he can choose not to play like an idiot. He can simply get up... picking up ONE sword as part of the move action given that he has a BAB of 1 or higher. And be ready to fight only having to endure ONE single AOO and no rounds of delay, assuming hopefully the AOO doesn't bring him down.

He may not be fighting at his optimal two handed best, but he's still a fighter, and he has his iteratives and any other tricks he's learned.


LazarX wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

Or he can choose not to play like an idiot. He can simply get up... picking up ONE sword as part of the move action given that he has a BAB of 1 or higher. And be ready to fight only having to endure ONE single AOO and no rounds of delay, assuming hopefully the AOO doesn't bring him down.

He may not be fighting at his optimal two handed best, but he's still a fighter, and he has his iteratives and any other tricks he's learned.

Where in the rules does it say that you can pick up a weapon as part of standing up?

For that matter, why wouldn't he pick up both given that the rule for drawing while moving allows you to draw 2 weapons with TWF, assuming what you said is RAW and based of the move+draw rules?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Snowblind wrote:
LazarX wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

Or he can choose not to play like an idiot. He can simply get up... picking up ONE sword as part of the move action given that he has a BAB of 1 or higher. And be ready to fight only having to endure ONE single AOO and no rounds of delay, assuming hopefully the AOO doesn't bring him down.

He may not be fighting at his optimal two handed best, but he's still a fighter, and he has his iteratives and any other tricks he's learned.

Where in the rules does it say that you can pick up a weapon as part of standing up?

For that matter, why wouldn't he pick up both given that the rule for drawing while moving allows you to draw 2 weapons with TWF, assuming what you said is RAW and based of the move+draw rules?

1. You can draw a weapon as part of a move action. I would consider picking up the weapon lying along side you as the same as drawing.

2. I'm not that grounded in the rules for two weapon drawing, so I went conservative.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:


1. You can draw a weapon as part of a move action. I would consider picking up the weapon lying along side you as the same as drawing.

2. I'm not that grounded in the rules for two weapon drawing, so I went conservative.

1. Picking up provokes a AOO. It is listed as a separate action from drawing a weapon which does not provoke an AOO.

2. Nothing here


Minos Judge wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Personally, I would allow a TWFer to pick up his weapons just like he draws them—in the same action—but that's just me.
The problem with this solution is that it is TOTALLY against the rules. It was a situation caused by not following RAW and then you have to change a rule to have it appear as more balanced?

Not really. It's how I would read any "I just got double-disarmed" situation.

LazarX wrote:
1. You can draw a weapon as part of a move action. I would consider picking up the weapon lying along side you as the same as drawing.

I'm pretty sure you draw it as part of movement, not a move action.

Grand Lodge

LazarX wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
LazarX wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

Or he can choose not to play like an idiot. He can simply get up... picking up ONE sword as part of the move action given that he has a BAB of 1 or higher. And be ready to fight only having to endure ONE single AOO and no rounds of delay, assuming hopefully the AOO doesn't bring him down.

He may not be fighting at his optimal two handed best, but he's still a fighter, and he has his iteratives and any other tricks he's learned.

Where in the rules does it say that you can pick up a weapon as part of standing up?

For that matter, why wouldn't he pick up both given that the rule for drawing while moving allows you to draw 2 weapons with TWF, assuming what you said is RAW and based of the move+draw rules?

1. You can draw a weapon as part of a move action. I would consider picking up the weapon lying along side you as the same as drawing.

2. I'm not that grounded in the rules for two weapon drawing, so I went conservative.

Umm... the rules do not in any way support any of this:

Draw Weapon is a move action that does not provoke and can be combined with a regular move (as in a movement action)

Pick up an object is a move action that provokes, and which does not have the super script allowing you to combine it with a regular move, and does not have the superscript that allows you to pick up two items at once with two weapon fighting.

These are two completely different actions under the rules, and you cannot combine draw with stand from prone anyway. Only with the "Move" move action.


Option X: You fall prone, and anything you were holding in your hands stays in your hands, but are no longer being clenched. Any Disarm maneuvers done against the sleeping target are vs. a DC of 10 +/- any applicable size modifiers. When the target awakes, they are not considered to be wielding any held weapons or shields until their turn in the initiative order (i.e., if they are woke due to taking damage, they would not be able to use their weapons for Attacks of Opportunity until their turn in the initiative order comes back around).


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Minos Judge wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Personally, I would allow a TWFer to pick up his weapons just like he draws them—in the same action—but that's just me.
The problem with this solution is that it is TOTALLY against the rules. It was a situation caused by not following RAW and then you have to change a rule to have it appear as more balanced?

Not really. It's how I would read any "I just got double-disarmed" situation.

I am confused. You would allow them to not use the rules and just pick them up? The rules state that you have to spend a move action to pick up the weapons individually as per table 8-2.


Oddman80 wrote:
Option X: You fall prone, and anything you were holding in your hands stays in your hands, but are no longer being clenched. Any Disarm maneuvers done against the sleeping target are vs. a DC of 10 +/- any applicable size modifiers. When the target awakes, they are not considered to be wielding any held weapons or shields until their turn in the initiative order (i.e., if they are woke due to taking damage, they would not be able to use their weapons for Attacks of Opportunity until their turn in the initiative order comes back around).

Why are you adding more complexity to a situation.

Ok your hands are full, but you do not count as having your weapons in your hands.

Plus you still have to deal with all the AOO if you make the mistake of surviving and then doing anything.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I've always assumed the sleep was magical so you just stand there as if hypnotized. I can see how others may rule they fall down sleeping though. Although ruling for sleep makes you unconscious, prone and unarmed really makes that spell too powerful for first level.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

So, in further reading, I've noted that the Sleep spell does not inflict Unconscious-ness. It explicitly inflicts the Helpless condition. The only time the Unconscious condition is mentioned is to say that the spell doesn't effect creatures that are Unconscious.

Quote:
A sleep spell causes a magical slumber to come upon 4 HD of creatures. Creatures with the fewest HD are affected first. Among creatures with equal HD, those who are closest to the spell's point of origin are affected first. HD that are not sufficient to affect a creature are wasted. Sleeping creatures are helpless. Slapping or wounding awakens an affected creature, but normal noise does not. Awakening a creature is a standard action (an application of the aid another action). Sleep does not target unconscious creatures, constructs, or undead creatures.

Furthermore, we know that Sleeping and Unconscious are two separate conditions from reading the Helpless entry.

Quote:

Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent's mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks get no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.

As a full-round action, an enemy can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace to a helpless foe. An enemy can also use a bow or crossbow, provided he is adjacent to the target. The attacker automatically hits and scores a critical hit. (A rogue also gets his sneak attack damage bonus against a helpless foe when delivering a coup de grace.) If the defender survives, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. Delivering a coup de grace provokes attacks of opportunity.

Creatures that are immune to critical hits do not take critical damage, nor do they need to make Fortitude saves to avoid being killed by a coup de grace.

The Helpless condition lists the one place that it is "equivalent" to being Prone, implying that it is not the same as being Prone.

Edit: And one final piece of information.

Quote:
A character with a Dexterity score of 0 is incapable of moving and is effectively immobile (but not unconscious).


Minos Judge wrote:
Oddman80 wrote:
Option X: You fall prone, and anything you were holding in your hands stays in your hands, but are no longer being clenched. Any Disarm maneuvers done against the sleeping target are vs. a DC of 10 +/- any applicable size modifiers. When the target awakes, they are not considered to be wielding any held weapons or shields until their turn in the initiative order (i.e., if they are woke due to taking damage, they would not be able to use their weapons for Attacks of Opportunity until their turn in the initiative order comes back around).

Why are you adding more complexity to a situation.

Ok your hands are full, but you do not count as having your weapons in your hands.

Plus you still have to deal with all the AOO if you make the mistake of surviving and then doing anything.

There would only be one AoO for Standing from Prone.

As to why add more complexity? Aparently there are people out there looking for a fair way to adjudicate the spell while keeping a higher level of realism in terms of the sleep working ling normal everyday sleep. I was simply throwing an option into the ring - curious what people thought.

Personally - I think you should magically keep standing - closer to hypnosis than actual sleep. If being shaken by an ally is enough to wake you from a slumber hex or sleep spell, then the actual act of falling down and hitting the ground would wake you as well.
That said - if someone hit your with a sleep spell as you were clinging to a tree branch from below (or using monkey bars - or doing the "slide down a wire holding on to a belt flung over top it" thing.. you get the picture) you would totally fall.


One of the more veteran employees at at my hospital ward tends to sit with his keychain in his hand whenever he's working a night shift - if he nods off while on the job he drops his key chain, then wakes up from the sound of the keys hitting the floor. I've seen it happen a few times and I've found it's an effective but somewhat unreliable method - he'll frequently be asleep and unresponsive for a minute or two before he drops the keys. This is because the muscles normally don't relax until you reach NREM 2 - it's possible to be in NREM 1 (dozing) and still maintain muscle control. Frequently someone who's woken up while in NREM 1 will not realize they had fallen asleep in the first place. Exhausted soldiers (and nurses!) that fall asleep while standing up typically don't progress into the deeper sleep phases but simply stay in NREM 1.

You could make an argument that a Sleep effect puts the target in a state of light sleep (the equivalent of NREM 1) and so he wouldn't fall down or drop his items. However, the Slumber hex specifically states that the target "falls into a deep, magical sleep, as per the spell sleep". The Sleep spell also states that "normal noise" is insufficient to wake up an afflicted target. While "normal noise" can spend from "footsteps" to "vuvuzela" depending on the GM, I still think these facts suggests that a simple doze is unlikely.

However, the Sleep spell also states that you can awaken an affected target by slapping them (an application of the aid another action). I find it perplexing that a simple slap is enough to wake someone up, but crashing to the floor (as a result of going prone) is not. Falling over without even trying to catch yourself tends to hurt significantly more than a simple slap. Obviously the idea of a Sleep spell that automatically wakens the target when he falls prone is self-defeating, but it leads some credence to the idea that targets that are Asleep do not go prone (at least not immediately).

Finally, the idea that asleep = unconscious is problematic on several levels. While they certainly have things in common, they are very different conditions.


LazarX wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
LazarX wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

Or he can choose not to play like an idiot. He can simply get up... picking up ONE sword as part of the move action given that he has a BAB of 1 or higher. And be ready to fight only having to endure ONE single AOO and no rounds of delay, assuming hopefully the AOO doesn't bring him down.

He may not be fighting at his optimal two handed best, but he's still a fighter, and he has his iteratives and any other tricks he's learned.

Where in the rules does it say that you can pick up a weapon as part of standing up?

For that matter, why wouldn't he pick up both given that the rule for drawing while moving allows you to draw 2 weapons with TWF, assuming what you said is RAW and based of the move+draw rules?

1. You can draw a weapon as part of a move action. I would consider picking up the weapon lying along side you as the same as drawing.

Not quite accurate - you can draw a weapon as part of a charge (provided you move less than half your speed) or "as part of a regular move". That specifically means when you use your move action to make a 'move', to move your speed. With that said, I think ruling that you are able to pick up the weapon you dropped while falling unconscious as part of the action to stand back up is a reasonable call. Barring extenuating circumstances (flying, fighting on a ramp or in a staircase) the weapon would have fallen straight down and landed close to your hand anyway.

Grand Lodge

Not necessarily, remember, it is probably going to fall business end first, and when the tip hits the end will pivot. That could result in it lieing hilt away from you, or even under you if it fell first. And then it could even bounce.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

... Huh. Well, guess I can imagine GMs who would not have you drop from sleep now. All the more power to them for actually putting forth some acceptable arguments as well. It's not enough to change my table rulings, but hey, that's just the way the game is.


Kudaku wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
LazarX wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Option 2: Cast a 1 round slumber on a TWF fighter. He falls to the ground and drops both swords. A round later he wakes up and loses his entire second round as he tries to pick up one sword (provoking) and then the other sword (provoking), and then he loses half of his third round as he stands up (provoking). If he survives being asleep for a round and then survives THREE AoOs, he can finally attack with just one of his weapons.

Or he can choose not to play like an idiot. He can simply get up... picking up ONE sword as part of the move action given that he has a BAB of 1 or higher. And be ready to fight only having to endure ONE single AOO and no rounds of delay, assuming hopefully the AOO doesn't bring him down.

He may not be fighting at his optimal two handed best, but he's still a fighter, and he has his iteratives and any other tricks he's learned.

Where in the rules does it say that you can pick up a weapon as part of standing up?

For that matter, why wouldn't he pick up both given that the rule for drawing while moving allows you to draw 2 weapons with TWF, assuming what you said is RAW and based of the move+draw rules?

1. You can draw a weapon as part of a move action. I would consider picking up the weapon lying along side you as the same as drawing.
Not quite accurate - you can draw a weapon as part of a charge (provided you move less than half your speed) or "as part of a regular move". That specifically means when you use your move action to make a 'move', to move your speed. With that said, I think ruling that you are able to pick up the weapon you dropped while falling unconscious as part of the action to stand back up is a reasonable call. Barring extenuating circumstances (flying, fighting on a ramp or in a staircase) the weapon would have fallen straight down and landed close to your hand anyway.

The problem with that ruling is that you are ignoring the rule that states you provoke a AOO when you pick up a fallen item.

SO you change the conditions imposed on you by one spell and then you have to ignore the rules in order to make it more balanced. That makes even less sense to me then not imposing extra conditions on a character to begin with.

Plus you now have to decide where the weapon has fallen so how would you determine that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Minos Judge wrote:
The problem with that ruling is that you are ignoring the rule that states you provoke a AOO when you pick up a fallen item.

But you don't provoke an AoO for drawing a weapon in easy reach. You could argue that equipping a weapon immediately next to your hand (as you are prone) is as convenient as drawing a weapon kept in a sheath.

Minos Judge wrote:
SO you change the conditions imposed on you by one spell and then you have to ignore the rules in order to make it more balanced. That makes even less sense to me then not imposing extra conditions on a character to begin with.

Ignoring the rules seems like a bit of a leap to me. It's also worth noting that I personally don't rule this way, I was just saying that I don't think Lazar's ruling was unreasonable.

..Which I believe is very close to being a first for me. I normally disagree with Lazar's rules interpretations by pure reflex.

Minos Judge wrote:
Plus you now have to decide where the weapon has fallen so how would you determine that?

By making a call on the spot after considering the situation and various environmental factors. It's no different from being disarmed while flying or underwater.

Just to be perfectly clear, I personally rule that Sleep spells render you prone and helpless, but not disarmed. At least in part I rule that way because I think Sleep effects are powerful/annoying enough as it is. That may or may not be how sleep effects are meant to be played, but I am comfortable using it that way for my own games.


I am not as skilled in parsing out the sections I want without re-posting everything in the text. So here goes.

Whereas it may seem "like a bit of a reach for you" you are ignoring the rule that explicitly stats that you provoke when picking up an item form the ground. Anything else is strictly done at the GM wish and i do not see how you can say any different.

Plus you are still rendering them prone. If you do not render them prone it will tone back how powerful/annoying that you feel it is. It will still be very useful but not overwhelm encounters.


Bit of a leap, not a reach. :)

I don't think I'm ignoring the rule for picking up items from a ground, I'm suggesting instead applying an alternate rule that I think is more applicable to how I envision the situation. Drawing a weapon states that the weapon needs to be within easy reach. I think that if you wanted to, you can make a reasonable argument that the weapon dropped while falling prone could be within easy reach. Whether or not it actually is within easy reach would depend on the GM. YMMV.

Two quick questions for you: Consider this image. What kind of action would the archer depicted on the far left need to to draw an arrow from the ground? What about the archer to his immediate right, who keeps his arrows in his belt?

I prefer prone to disarmed because prone is character-neutral. Disarming is more of a hassle for characters that expect to hold two items or wield two weapons. TWF users have it bad enough as it is.

As for parsing, just hit the quote button, then add in [quote = Poster] (with no spaces) and

between each section you want to reply to. It makes it easier to break up a post to different sections and reply to each section in turn. :)


When I mess this up I will blame you:)

Kudaku wrote:
Bit of a leap, not a reach. :)

Sorry my mistake.

Kudaku wrote:

I don't think I'm ignoring the rule for picking up items from a ground, I'm suggesting instead applying an alternate rule that I think is more applicable to how I envision the situation. Drawing a weapon states that the weapon needs to be within easy reach. I think that if you wanted to, you can make a reasonable argument that the weapon dropped while falling prone could be within easy reach. Whether or not it actually is within easy reach would depend on the GM. YMMV.

Two quick questions for you: Consider this image. What kind of action would the archer depicted on the far left need to to draw an arrow from the ground? What about the archer to his immediate right, who keeps his arrows in his belt?

I would have to say that they would use whatever action it normally is, because they set up a special circumstance. They intentionally set things up to be easier. They also did not drop it while they were effected by sleep. When you drop them in an uncontrolled manner then you would say that they provoked attacks. The reason being that they have to look around and figure out where the weapons in question are located. Even if they are close by they are still not where you last had them.

Kudaku wrote:
I prefer prone to disarmed because prone is character-neutral. Disarming is more of a hassle for characters that expect to hold two items or wield two weapons. TWF users have it bad enough as it is.

I HATE prone. While asleep you cannot control what happens. When prone EVERYTHING is on you. Posted it in "things that get you shunned"


Minos Judge wrote:
When I mess this up I will blame you:)

Nailed it! Which is even better since I just noticed I accidentally mangled my explanation! xD

Minos Judge wrote:
Kudaku wrote:
Bit of a leap, not a reach. :)
Sorry my mistake.

No worries!

Minos Judge wrote:
I would have to say that they would use whatever action it normally is, because they set up a special circumstance. They intentionally set things up to be easier.

I think that's a reasonable call and I agree with it. The main reason I asked you those questions was that I wanted to make sure you were open to "the idea of it" since there are some GMs that will argue that the archer would need to use the "pick up an object" action because the quiver is on the ground. If you had been one of those GM's I wouldn't really see any point in debating it further. While it's good to try and apply the rules as correctly as possible, it's also important to apply a healthy dose of common sense.

So if we agree that there is some leeway in when "draw" and when "pick up" come into play, the next question is where you draw the line between "drawing a weapon in easy reach" and "picking up a weapon that's not in easy reach". Depending on how people envision magical sleep affecting the target, being asleep could mean anything from "drop the weapon mid-swing, then crash to the ground" to "gradually lower yourself to the ground, then slowly loosen the grip on your weapon". If you rule that Sleep works like the former definition then I absolutely think "pick up an object" is the most correct option, but as you draw closer to the latter definition then "draw a weapon" or "you were never disarmed" becomes more reasonable calls.

Minos Judge wrote:
I HATE prone. While asleep you cannot control what happens. When prone EVERYTHING is on you. Posted it in "things that get you shunned"

I gotta say I don't really understand the reasoning here. What do you mean with "EVERYTHING is on you"?


I did a quick search to find something depicting how I imagine a magical sleep effect would look like and found this video. Starting at about 30 seconds in that video you see dozens of people magically put to sleep - some fall asleep while still standing, some lie down, some drop objects, some hold onto them. It really helped me see why people can have such different opinions on this. :)

Grand Lodge

Kudaku wrote:
I did a quick search to find something depicting how I imagine a magical sleep effect would look like and found this video. Starting at about 30 seconds in that video you see dozens of people magically put to sleep - some fall asleep while still standing, some lie down, some drop objects, some hold onto them. It really helped me see why people can have such different opinions on this. :)

Having watched that I have a new rule proposal:

When sleep is cast on you, make a profession soldier (or other similar profession) check to stay standing, holding your weapons (DC 15?). If you can make a DC 25 check, people must make a sense motive check to realize you are asleep from a distance. :)


Kudaku wrote:


I gotta say I don't really understand the reasoning here. What do you mean with "EVERYTHING is on you"?

Every time I have been made prone. I have just gotten pummeled. You trigger an AOO for almost every action that you can do. My best action to date is to go full defense and hope that the rest of the party kills them before they attack me again.

I have had a bad GMPC with heavy armour move out of the way to get the non-sentient dog to charge me at the back of the party. PFS needed 4 to play and only had 3.

I have been beaten trying to stand-up and pick up my weapons to attack( learned to carry twice as many weapons as needed to by-pass that AOO)

You are -4 to AC against melee +4 for range; however I am usually based so that is not relevant most of the time.

I hate that I seem to have no good options. Most conditions you have no control and you just go with it. This one just makes me pick how I want to suffer.

Community Manager

Removed a couple of posts. Please keep it civil, thanks!

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There actually is a seldom-noticed line in the rulebook which the GM can use to resolve these sorts of rules questions.

Core Rulebook, p. 440: "The Material Plane [...] operates under the same set of natural laws that our own real world does."

(Not that the rulebook does particularly well emulating that elsewhere, but that's where "specific trumps general" comes in handy. And it's hard to imagine a more general statement than the one above.)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Thanks for that find, Lincoln.

The Exchange

Yes, I know it's pedantic. But apparently we GMs need a rule to give us the authority to say "No, one grain of rice every three days is not enough to avoid starvation!" (Because the rules-as-written don't specify a quantity on p. 445.)


Lincoln Hills wrote:

There actually is a seldom-noticed line in the rulebook which the GM can use to resolve these sorts of rules questions.

Core Rulebook, p. 440: "The Material Plane [...] operates under the same set of natural laws that our own real world does."

(Not that the rulebook does particularly well emulating that elsewhere, but that's where "specific trumps general" comes in handy. And it's hard to imagine a more general statement than the one above.)

I am going to make the assumption that you believe that the sleep spell makes you prone and disarmed.

Now ignoring all of the points about RAW.

The problem with the statement made on P.440 is that some of us have seen things like a roommate who sleeps standing up. Not for 8 hours, but for easily the duration of the spell in question. We have also seen people standing watches who were asleep standing up. Now I personally cannot do this, I have to have a horizontal surface to sleep on. However that dose not help at all with the balance of power that this spell has.
Color Spray, which is considered to be equivalent, lasts for rounds and gets progressively less effective.
Sleep lasts for minutes. It also according to some inflects at least 2 if not 3 conditions[Helpless(all agree, prone(some agree) and disarmed(this is newly listed and I had not seen it listed before)]

Now I am not counting player actions that can impact this, because then you have to count for bad dice rolls and I am strictly looking at what is listed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lincoln Hills wrote:

There actually is a seldom-noticed line in the rulebook which the GM can use to resolve these sorts of rules questions.

Core Rulebook, p. 440: "The Material Plane [...] operates under the same set of natural laws that our own real world does."

(Not that the rulebook does particularly well emulating that elsewhere, but that's where "specific trumps general" comes in handy. And it's hard to imagine a more general statement than the one above.)

That's nice.

My wife used to get out of bed, go to the kitchen, and start cooking. She would hold pans, spatulas, etc., open the fridge, grab food. All the while totally asleep, standing, on her feet, not prone, not disarmed. I could talk to her and she would answer, but her answers came from whatever dream she was having. For example, I could say "What are you doing?" and she might say "Don't leave the spaghetti on the TV" while she's standing in the kitchen holding a frying pan.

Thankfully, she never managed to turn on the stove.

Real world true story.

So, is it OK if, in my campaign, I follow that rule on page 440 and have the sleep spell make people walk into the the nearest kitchen and start cooking, while dreaming of spaghetti on the television? Because to me, that sounds like NOT prone and NOT disarmed...

51 to 100 of 209 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Does Sleep make you Prone? + Do you drop held items? All Messageboards