What penalties for a paralyzed creature using a fly spell?


Rules Questions

401 to 450 of 573 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
el cuervo wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
el cuervo wrote:
What you are talking about also has a rule. When you go without sleep in athfinder, you generally gain the fatigued condition unless you have a specific exception.
Mind quoting the rule that says that? It was my understanding that it didn't exist.

It's not in the CRB, it's from AP #44:

AP #44 wrote:
Characters who do not get a full night's sleep may suffer the effects of fatigue. If a PC does not get at least 6 hours of sleep, she must make a DC 15 Fortitude save or be fatigued and take a –1 penalty on all other checks and saving throws against sleep effects. A second night without sleep requires another DC 15 Fortitude save. A failed save results in the character becoming exhausted and the penalties increasing to –2. A third failed save on the next night increases the penalties to –3.

I actually got that mixed up with the other rule that was already in discussion. When you take damage from hustling or a forced march you also gain the fatigued condition.

I've heard that Paizo was infamous for scattering their rules, but geez. That really should have been in the Core Rulebook somewhere, right alongside starvation and thirst.


It's in the FAQ for the CRB:

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qif


Ravingdork wrote:
I've heard that Paizo was infamous for scattering their rules, but geez. That really should have been in the Core Rulebook somewhere, right alongside starvation and thirst.

Oh no! Now I need to find the rules for a strong cup of coffee!


Do we have an FAQ request for clarification on what is considered a "purely mental action"? I don't think we'll get anywhere till that's cleared up, and I'd also like to know for the purpose of familiar melding, as that limits you to mental actions, though not purely mental, and I'd like to know where that line is drawn.


el cuervo wrote:
Entryhazard wrote:
Still keep in mind that there are Move Actions that are no physical movement but do something else
Flying is not one of those.

Hover.

/cevah


Cevah wrote:
el cuervo wrote:
Entryhazard wrote:
Still keep in mind that there are Move Actions that are no physical movement but do something else
Flying is not one of those.

Hover.

/cevah

Hovering is a physical act because it requires making a dexterity-based skill check. Dexterity is a physical stat (as opposed to a mental stat).


el cuervo wrote:
Cevah wrote:
el cuervo wrote:
Entryhazard wrote:
Still keep in mind that there are Move Actions that are no physical movement but do something else
Flying is not one of those.

Hover.

/cevah

Hovering is a physical act because it requires making a dexterity-based skill check. Dexterity is a physical stat (as opposed to a mental stat).

If the fly spell gave you a dexterity bonus or a physical bonus to your fly skill, It would be a lot easier to convince me to your opinion. However, the bonus given is either an untyped or a magical bonus. This means you can have a -5 penalty to your fly skill and still have a positive bonus to your fly skill without any ranks in fly. This tells me you can perform the skill without any use of one's physical body.


Does that mean you'd also let a paralyzed person jump when he's under the effects of the Jump spell? Similar situation.

A "physical bonus to your fly skill", what does that even mean? Can you give examples?


Forseti wrote:

Does that mean you'd also let a paralyzed person jump when he's under the effects of the Jump spell? Similar situation.

A "physical bonus to your fly skill", what does that even mean? Can you give examples?

Muleback cords make your strength higher in regards to carrying capacity.

Jump does not give a new ability, it only adds to a preexisting one.


Why is that different? Can you quote rules to explain it?


Some flying maneuvers (such as are listed in the fly skill) require dexterity. However, flying without doing a special maneuver does not require a fly skill check, and thus does not require any dexterity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the biggest problem with this particular issue is the underlying fly rules (and I use the term "rules" lightly). The fly rules in 3.5 were a steaming pile of, well, not very good rules. Pathfinder did a copy, small edit, and paste. Leaving us with an edited steaming pile of, alright, moving on.

The fly rules don't make sense, which is why there is so much disagreement in how to resolve a conflict not covered by the rules. The rules, in general, expect all of us the "fill in the gaps" using common sense. That's hard to do when there is no facing in the game, yet there are skill check DCs to turn when flying, but not at the start of your turn. Or when it is unclear what actions you have to take. Fly at least half my speed (move action), but a DC 15 fly check allows me to hover. Do I still have to use a move action? Can I take a 5-foot step when hovering? What about charging? I've seen a real-life flying charge attack (hawk dive bombed some other bird - it was not pretty). Is that possible in the game? If so, why does the Derhii (Bestiary 3) have a special ability allowing it? The gaps and inconsistencies go on and on (just look at the posts on this topic).

It wouldn't be so much of a problem if flying were some corner case that rarely comes up. But flying (especially use of the fly spell) is a staple of the game since it generally provides immunity to like 90% of all threats.

What we really need is a comprehensive set of fly rules. They don't have to mimic or match reality. But they do have be consistent with themselves and the rest of the rules, and fairly easy to understand. I know it won't solve everything (what is a mental action?)' but it would be a good start.


whew wrote:
Some flying maneuvers (such as are listed in the fly skill) require dexterity. However, flying without doing a special maneuver does not require a fly skill check, and thus does not require any dexterity.

So... it is purely mental, until it gets a little difficult when it becomes dex based, then it goes back to being purely mental?


Fergie wrote:
whew wrote:
Some flying maneuvers (such as are listed in the fly skill) require dexterity. However, flying without doing a special maneuver does not require a fly skill check, and thus does not require any dexterity.
So... it is purely mental, until it gets a little difficult when it becomes dex based, then it goes back to being purely mental?

It can be purely mental, even when making difficult maneuvers provided you have the magical assistance to do so.

I have changed position on this when I realized that you can still have a bonus even when you have -5 penalty.

Obviously body movement and positionsof limbs must not be that big a deal, or else there would be penalties to flight and combat if you were doing both.


Dexterity, by the way, isn't a physical stat.

There are no physical or mental stats. That is a commonly used house rule that seems to exist at every table.

Also, even if the rules called out categories of physical and mental stats (it doesn't), you can simply change the required stat for Fly (the skill) to Wisdom.

It makes me sad that so many people are ignoring the text of the spell that talks about how it is controlled.

"Using a fly spell requires only as much concentration as walking"

Yes, this sentence doesn't say 'control' or 'mental action'.

But ignoring it is... well I don't even know what to say there.

If I was at a table and told the GM I wanted to use the Fly spell, and he stopped me and said:

"I don't understand what you mean, 'USE' isn't a game mechanic. Please phrase your request using only sentences from published materials"

I would probably call a mental health professional. I mean, seriously.

I want to use a spell, how can I use it?

Let's say 'Fly'...

I don't think it is unclear that it requires only as much concentration as walking.

In fact, I just typed out a quote from the spell without applying quotes.

To argue that using the spell requires effort OTHER than as much concentration as walking is to go against published material.

Might as well just use your Intelligence bonus to melee damage, and argue that it's because you are smart enough to know where to stab.

Makes sense, but isn't what has been published as a basic rule.

In regards to action types, a move action isn't limited to movement, as Dominate Person clearly shows (telepathic connection to victim, but uses a 'move action' to direct).

This isn't a 'physical action' (an unpublished, but commonly acknowledged game term), it's... something else. "mental action"?

If you want to base an argument off the assumption that 'mental actions' don't exist, then you must also acknowledge that 'physical actions' are equally non-existent.

The fly skill requires Dex rolls. Being paralyzed gives you a Dex of 0.

It does NOT prevent you from rolling. There is no such thing as 'physical stats' or 'physical skills'.

If I'm wrong, please cite the source. I'm trying to stick to published materials, I would appreciate if you did the same.


Fergie wrote:
whew wrote:
Some flying maneuvers (such as are listed in the fly skill) require dexterity. However, flying without doing a special maneuver does not require a fly skill check, and thus does not require any dexterity.
So... it is purely mental, until it gets a little difficult when it becomes dex based, then it goes back to being purely mental?

Nope, control of the spell is purely mental, and if you want to attempt a difficult maneuver, then (and only then) you must make a Fly check to do it.

You can use Wisdom instead of Dex for Fly, as shown earlier in another post. Not that this matters.

Requiring a Fly check at specific times doesn't not prevent the use of the spell.

It simply does what it says.

No more, no less.

My argument is based off of what is written, the counterarguments are based on assumptions and unpublished opinions.

See my above post about 'physical actions', 'mental actions', 'physical stats' and 'mental stats'.


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Fergie wrote:
whew wrote:
Some flying maneuvers (such as are listed in the fly skill) require dexterity. However, flying without doing a special maneuver does not require a fly skill check, and thus does not require any dexterity.
So... it is purely mental, until it gets a little difficult when it becomes dex based, then it goes back to being purely mental?

It can be purely mental, even when making difficult maneuvers provided you have the magical assistance to do so.

I have changed position on this when I realized that you can still have a bonus even when you have -5 penalty.

Obviously body movement and positionsof limbs must not be that big a deal, or else there would be penalties to flight and combat if you were doing both.

They aren't a big thing, the combat rules ignore such things regularly. Probably to uncomplicated and stream line playing a non-simulationist game, perhaps?

It doesn't make or break this argument and is irrelevant (like most points you have brought up), just random pot shots.


Skylancer4 wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Fergie wrote:
whew wrote:
Some flying maneuvers (such as are listed in the fly skill) require dexterity. However, flying without doing a special maneuver does not require a fly skill check, and thus does not require any dexterity.
So... it is purely mental, until it gets a little difficult when it becomes dex based, then it goes back to being purely mental?

It can be purely mental, even when making difficult maneuvers provided you have the magical assistance to do so.

I have changed position on this when I realized that you can still have a bonus even when you have -5 penalty.

Obviously body movement and positionsof limbs must not be that big a deal, or else there would be penalties to flight and combat if you were doing both.

They aren't a big thing, the combat rules ignore such things regularly. Probably to uncomplicated and stream line playing a non-simulationist game, perhaps?

It doesn't make or break this argument and is irrelevant (like most points you have brought up), just random pot shots.

Of course you would say that when these little pot shots add more and more holes in the oppositions position. The thing is, until the devs fall on one side of the line or the other, we really don't know who is ultimately is correct.


Skylancer4 wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Fergie wrote:
whew wrote:
Some flying maneuvers (such as are listed in the fly skill) require dexterity. However, flying without doing a special maneuver does not require a fly skill check, and thus does not require any dexterity.
So... it is purely mental, until it gets a little difficult when it becomes dex based, then it goes back to being purely mental?

It can be purely mental, even when making difficult maneuvers provided you have the magical assistance to do so.

I have changed position on this when I realized that you can still have a bonus even when you have -5 penalty.

Obviously body movement and positionsof limbs must not be that big a deal, or else there would be penalties to flight and combat if you were doing both.

They aren't a big thing, the combat rules ignore such things regularly. Probably to uncomplicated and stream line playing a non-simulationist game, perhaps?

It doesn't make or break this argument and is irrelevant (like most points you have brought up), just random pot shots.

Nah, I don't think it is irrelevant. It points out that you don't need to make roles for simple tasks.

WHEN those tasks require a roll is when the skill is being used.

You don't use Acrobatics while walking, you also don't use Fly when flying, until you perform an action calling for a roll.

If you had an effect preventing Acrobatics from being used, you would still be able to walk.

Same with Fly.

Just because you CAN use the skill doesn't mean you MUST use the skill.

The Fly spell allows you to put yourself in a situation where you might need to roll the Fly skill.

The Fly skill in no way controls whether or not you can fly, it simply determines your chances of success if you are put in a situation where a roll is called for.

The Fly skill either a)determines whether or not spells that grant flight can affect you (not printed) or b)is used only in situations where a roll is called for (as printed).

I'm gonna stick with the rules, myself, you can do what you like.


It is irrelevant as they are overall, flavor options. Things that mechanically don't matter. Fluff on how you describe what is mechanically happening in the game. You aren't putting holes in my argument, you are tossing tangential crap against the wall and hoping something will stick.

The rules don't explicitly state it is a mental action. End of story. Saying it is, isn't RAW, it is your description of an undefined. That doesn't make it "official" or "correct". It is just how you choose to believe it works, without actual written rules to back it up. your opinion on the intend of something.

RAW it is undefined, so you absolutely cannot assert your position. Where I can absolutely assert that it isn't a purely mental action, because such actions would be defined, as they have been done in the past with other rules published at the same time and since.

Paralyze states purely mental actions are the only exclusion. Barring wording explicitly stating "this is a mental action" you are unable to say an undefined action is such an action, RAW.

Feel free to stick to the "rules" (as you think they are intended). But quit stating your position is RAW.

Edit: Quite frankly once you conceeded that it was undefined, you forfeit your argument. Admitting it isn't defined, means mechanically it cannot be purely mental, as it isn't defined. Logically.


Skylancer4 wrote:

It is irrelevant as they are overall, flavor options. Things that mechanically don't matter. Fluff on how you describe what is mechanically happening in the game. You aren't putting holes in my argument, you are tossing crap against the wall and hoping something will stick.

The rules don't explicitly state it is a mental action. End of story. Saying it is, isn't RAW, it is your description of an undefined. That doesn't make it "official" or "correct". It is just how you choose to believe it works, without actual written rules to back it up.

RAW it is undefined, so you absolutely cannot assert your position. Where I can absolutely assert that it isn't a purely mental action, because such actions would be defined, as they have been done in the past with other rules published at, and since.

Paralyze states purely mental actions are the only exclusion. Barring wording explicitly stating "this is a mental action" you are unable to say an undefined action is such an action, RAW.

Feel free to stick to the "rules" (as you think they are intended). But quit stating your position is RAW.

Edit: Quite frankly once you conceeded that it was undefined, you forfeit your argument. Admitting it isn't defined, means mechanically it cannot be purely mental, as it isn't defined. Logically.

So if someone at your table said they wanted to perform an action, you would say no, because Perform is, RAW, a skill? If they said they wanted to use a potion, would they waste that action because "Use" doesn't exist, RAW?

The assumption that Fly is under the mental control of the caster is based off the text of the spell itself, not a convoluted reading of a skill that the spell may occasionally have you roll on, and another false assumption that even if actions were either physical or mental, that the Fly skill somehow belongs in the unwritten "physical" category for some reason.

No categorization of "physical" is mentioned, but "mental" is.

Take a step back, ask yourself, is concentration a physical act?

If these categories were to be created, what would it be? You can't talk about physical actions and ignore mental. Either acknowledge both, or use neither in your arguments.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
alexd1976 wrote:
Take a step back, ask yourself, is concentration a physical act?

No, but the flying that results from it is a physical action.

Just like the walking that results from only as much concentration as it takes to fly.

Every physical action starts with a mental "act", except autonomous ones.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It doesn't matter, as the game deals with mechanics.

The fact that it is possibly a mental action, isn't enough to pass the Paralyze's exclusion requirement of purely mental. For it to work, it NEEDS to be a purely mental action. As it is not defined as a purely mental action, it cannot be used.

The fact you are making assumptions about a RAW mechanic... You know the old saying right? And that points to the main problem you have in this discussion. Don't make assumptions. Don't dismiss the fact that the spell actually references a physical based skill as "convoluted" to make your point some how more important. No mention of mental is mentioned, but you say it is. If it were, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

It could be all mental, it could be mostly mental, it could be just a tiny bit mental, it could be all physical, mostly physical, or a tiny bit physical. But it is not, by game rules or mechanics, a purely mental action. Other abilities are specifically called out as purely mental, those get to be used. An action that isn't defined, doesn't get past the requirement check, and so doesn't get to be used.

It is a stringent check, in an exception based game. If it isn't quantified, you cannot say it is or isn't. As such, it fails to meet the exception test. As a mechanic, we can ignore or include as needed, as was done in the writing of this spell and the status effect.

By being undefined, it is not a purely mental action and so the Paralyze write up keeps it from functioning. This is a pure logic problem, explicitly categorized "purely mental" actions work. Uncategorized actions don't make the cut unless you assume things, which is what you are doing, by your own admission.

That is what they call "reading into the rules"...

If there is a dress code that requires you to wear a tuxedo, you don't get to go in if you are wearing a T-shirt with the image of a tux on it. They are not the same thing. And that is the argument you are making.


Forseti wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
Take a step back, ask yourself, is concentration a physical act?

No, but the flying that results from it is a physical action.

Just like the walking that results from only as much concentration as it takes to fly.

Every physical action starts with a mental "act", except autonomous ones.

If you want to delete the line that actually talks about the requirements to use the spell from the spell description, you might as well delete the bit that grants you flight altogether. Im not looking to delete text here, just use what the developers took time to write.

I paid good money for my CRB, and by gum, I'm gonna use it.

How much sharpy marker is in yours? Sounds like a lot.

If you want to assume that walking is a physical action, i will assume that concentrating on Fly is a mental one.

I can find text showing the existence of mental actions (though not really elaborated upon). Can you find text proving the existence of your "physical action"?

This thread has been very informative, thanks to everyone for their input!


alexd1976 wrote:
Forseti wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
Take a step back, ask yourself, is concentration a physical act?

No, but the flying that results from it is a physical action.

Just like the walking that results from only as much concentration as it takes to fly.

Every physical action starts with a mental "act", except autonomous ones.

If you want to delete the line that actually talks about the requirements to use the spell from the spell description, you might as well delete the bit that grants you flight altogether. Im not looking to delete text here, just use what the developers took time to write.

Really? I referenced it twice in the post you just quoted. I just attribute a different meaning to it, because the one you're using isn't in line with the concept of concentrating on spells in this game.

But you never answer the tough questions...

How can you perform 5' steps under your paradigm?

Here's another interesting one: I raise a skeleton. A mindless undead creature. I cast a Fly spell on it and command it to attack some birds flying overhead.

Flying takes only as much concentration as walking. The skeleton can walk. Can it now fly as well, if I direct it to? Do you need a mind to "concentrate"? How would it "control" the spell in its mindless state? If a skeleton can't concentrate, it can't walk, unless the "amount of concentration" needed to walk is zero for a skeleton. Is it then also zero to be able to fly for the skeleton?


Forseti wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
Forseti wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
Take a step back, ask yourself, is concentration a physical act?

No, but the flying that results from it is a physical action.

Just like the walking that results from only as much concentration as it takes to fly.

Every physical action starts with a mental "act", except autonomous ones.

If you want to delete the line that actually talks about the requirements to use the spell from the spell description, you might as well delete the bit that grants you flight altogether. Im not looking to delete text here, just use what the developers took time to write.

Really? I referenced it twice in the post you just quoted. I just attribute a different meaning to it, because the one you're using isn't in line with the concept of concentrating on spells in this game.

But you never answer the tough questions...

How can you perform 5' steps under your paradigm?

Here's another interesting one: I raise a skeleton. A mindless undead creature. I cast a Fly spell on it and command it to attack some birds flying overhead.

Flying takes only as much concentration as walking. The skeleton can walk. Can it now fly as well, if I direct it to? Do you need a mind to "concentrate"? How would it "control" the spell in its mindless state? If a skeleton can't concentrate, it can't walk, unless the "amount of concentration" needed to walk is zero for a skeleton. Is it then also zero to be able to fly for the skeleton?

Yet again, if you read every occurrence of a word that has been assigned a game mechanic as having to apply that mechanic within the concept being described in the sentence, you will rapidly lose the ability to:

a)use the rules in any meaningful way
b)be able to communicate with other humans in logical manner

You can use the word concentrate in a sentence without having it refer to the section in spellcasting that talks about it.

It is a word that existed in the english language LONG before this game.

How would I perform a 5' move under my paradigm? Um... I guess by taking the figure on the map and moving it one square?

As for mindless skeletons, they would continue to move with as much expenditure of effort as before having Fly on them.

They are able to walk, and Fly requires as much concentration as walking, so since they can concentrate enough to walk (as they clearly are able to), we once again go back to the Fly spell... THERE IT IS!

That line of text saying Fly takes just as much concentration! So I guess I would say they can use the spell as well.

I'm not trying to argue that using Fly to move should be a free action, simply that you can use your magical spell as it is written.

Once again, if you want to acknowledge the existence of this unpublished, nebulous 'physical' action but ignore the published 'mental' action, it will clearly appear that everything would require the 'physical' action. But then all you are doing is ignoring published text in favour of unpublished opinion.

Worth noting, the save against Fly isn't Fort, it's Will. I'm sure this has no meaning, but to me, it's another little clue about what the writers were aiming at.

Anywho, I keep promising myself I'm gonna stop posting on here, cause it's just a bunch of people screaming their viewpoints at each other and nothing new is being talked about...

Time for pizza.

I'm sure I will be back.


alexd1976 wrote:


Worth noting, the save against Fly isn't Fort, it's Will. I'm sure this has no meaning, but to me, it's another little clue about what the writers were aiming at.

This actually made me laugh, because you insist that the fact that Fly refers back to the Fly skill means nothing. Talk about hypocritical.

The Exchange

LazarX wrote:


There isn't one. It's a natural consequence of the fact that the rules dont' cover every fiddly bit. It's also a logical conclusion of the paralyzed condition.

To put it simply, I don't consider flying even by magical means as a purely mental act. So paralyzed means you drop like a stone.. period.

I disagree that it is necessarily the logical conclusion. Take, for instance, a paraplegic who is paralyzed from the waste down because of an injury to the spinal column. The injury doesn't necessarily affect the motor centers of the brain, those may well be perfectly intact. Paralysis occurs because the signal from the brain to the extremities is interrupted somewhere along its course, not necessarily at the brain center. An injury to the brain's motor control center could certainly result in total or partial paralysis, but the injury doesn't have to be there.

If you then generalize that reality to the magical fantasy of the game, then you could reasonably conclude that during paralysis, the brain could still attempt to send movement signals to the body, but the signals are simply blocked by the magic (or poison, or whatever caused the paralysis, such as a ghoul's touch). As such, the CONCENTRATION equivalent of walking is still there, and the body under a Fly spell might still be able to move in a limited fashion, since the propulsion is from the magic, not from physical effort. That, of course, is assuming the Fly spell was already active when the paralysis occurred. You would not be able to make a Reflex save, nor would you be able to add you Dex bonus to Fly skill checks, but otherwise, you should be able to move in limited fashion.


Nightwish wrote:
LazarX wrote:


There isn't one. It's a natural consequence of the fact that the rules dont' cover every fiddly bit. It's also a logical conclusion of the paralyzed condition.

To put it simply, I don't consider flying even by magical means as a purely mental act. So paralyzed means you drop like a stone.. period.

I disagree that it is necessarily the logical conclusion. Take, for instance, a paraplegic who is paralyzed from the waste down because of an injury to the spinal column. The injury doesn't necessarily affect the motor centers of the brain, those may well be perfectly intact. Paralysis occurs because the signal from the brain to the extremities is interrupted somewhere along its course, not necessarily at the brain center. An injury to the brain's motor control center could certainly result in total or partial paralysis, but the injury doesn't have to be there.

If you then generalize that reality to the magical fantasy of the game, then you could reasonably conclude that during paralysis, the brain could still attempt to send movement signals to the body, but the signals are simply blocked by the magic (or poison, or whatever caused the paralysis, such as a ghoul's touch). As such, the CONCENTRATION equivalent of walking is still there, and the body under a Fly spell might still be able to move in a limited fashion, since the propulsion is from the magic, not from physical effort. That, of course, is assuming the Fly spell was already active when the paralysis occurred. You would not be able to make a Reflex save, nor would you be able to add you Dex bonus to Fly skill checks, but otherwise, you should be able to move in limited fashion.

I don't know that anyone is saying it isn't a reasonable conclusion.

I know I'm saying it isn't a mechanically sound one. The rules just don't state it is a purely mental action, so it doesn't get a pass on the Paralyze mechanic. That the spell itself refers to a physically based skill and encumbrance, just shows intent from my view. But even without that, lack of "this is a mental action" means it is a no go.


The fact that flight by means of the Fly spell has its speed defined by encumbrance and type of armor worn, strongly implies a physical effort.

A lightly encumbered subject wearing a medium armor made of steel can't fly as fast as another person carrying the exact same amount of weight if he's wearing a mithral version of that armor, even if they try it with the exact same aerodynamic profile, volume and weight. (Assume the mithral guy is carrying some extra weight to compensate for the weight difference of their armors.)

Why is that? Same weight, same volume, same aerodynamic profile. The only difference is that the first person has a less accommodating armor, therefore, he can't fly as fast.

How does the "mental" paradigm deal with this discrepancy?


You'd think if people were actually interested in this getting resolved instead of arguing there'd be way more FAQ requests.


No one else cares.


Now it's a matter of who's going to be right and who's going to be wrong.


I will man up and say I'm wrong if the devs support the other side.


Well, won't it be obvious at that point? ;)


Maybe, but some people hide in shame.


Skylancer4 wrote:
Nightwish wrote:
LazarX wrote:


There isn't one. It's a natural consequence of the fact that the rules dont' cover every fiddly bit. It's also a logical conclusion of the paralyzed condition.

To put it simply, I don't consider flying even by magical means as a purely mental act. So paralyzed means you drop like a stone.. period.

I disagree that it is necessarily the logical conclusion. Take, for instance, a paraplegic who is paralyzed from the waste down because of an injury to the spinal column. The injury doesn't necessarily affect the motor centers of the brain, those may well be perfectly intact. Paralysis occurs because the signal from the brain to the extremities is interrupted somewhere along its course, not necessarily at the brain center. An injury to the brain's motor control center could certainly result in total or partial paralysis, but the injury doesn't have to be there.

If you then generalize that reality to the magical fantasy of the game, then you could reasonably conclude that during paralysis, the brain could still attempt to send movement signals to the body, but the signals are simply blocked by the magic (or poison, or whatever caused the paralysis, such as a ghoul's touch). As such, the CONCENTRATION equivalent of walking is still there, and the body under a Fly spell might still be able to move in a limited fashion, since the propulsion is from the magic, not from physical effort. That, of course, is assuming the Fly spell was already active when the paralysis occurred. You would not be able to make a Reflex save, nor would you be able to add you Dex bonus to Fly skill checks, but otherwise, you should be able to move in limited fashion.

I don't know that anyone is saying it isn't a reasonable conclusion.

I know I'm saying it isn't a mechanically sound one. The rules just don't state it is a purely mental action, so it doesn't get a pass on the Paralyze mechanic. That the spell itself refers to a physically based skill and...

There is no such thing as a physical skill. This is a common phrase with no actual occurrence in published materials.

There are no 'physical' or 'mental' stats printed either.

So mental actions are listed as an option in printed materials, and you use a made up adopted phrase as an argument that the printed action type doesn't exist, or can't be used...

Interesting.

Even if your usage of non-published terminology was accepted as rules valid for the purposes of this discussion, there is still the fact that Fly isn't a 'physically based skill'. It is simply a DEX based skill, and you can change that to WIS instead. This imaginary 'physical skill' designation has been made up during the course of this threads meandering discussion of rules.

In any case, it never calls out any requirement to use the skill for the spell to function, simply that there are situations where one might be required to roll the skill.

If the spell required the skill, it would say so. It does not. There is no text to support the idea that Fly can't work without rolling the skill, there are however several examples given in the spell of how it can function without making any Fly skill checks.

So...

If we assume 'physically based skills' is a real thing, we still don't have anything saying that you must be able to use the Fly skill to have the Fly spell function.

If we are going to assume your fabricated situation (an arbitrary designation applied to a skill that didn't previously have one) is acceptable, I would ask you grant me a lesser privilege:

Instead of creating new designations for existing content, I interpreted a single phrase in a fashion that isn't a huge stretch.

Please consider the fact that I changed the rules less than you did for my explanation of how Fly would work, I merely assumed one phrase meant something very very similar to what it said.

The other side of this argument has come up with a series of new rules and designations, so have altered the content of the game more than I have.


Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Maybe, but some people hide in shame.

I prefer to hide in pancakes drowning in butter and bourbon maple syrup.


Deadbeat Doom wrote:
Rogar Stonebow wrote:
Maybe, but some people hide in shame.
I prefer to hide in pancakes drowning in butter and bourbon maple syrup.

Are you not afraid of being devoured, or is that the point?


alexd1976 wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
Nightwish wrote:
LazarX wrote:


There isn't one. It's a natural consequence of the fact that the rules dont' cover every fiddly bit. It's also a logical conclusion of the paralyzed condition.

To put it simply, I don't consider flying even by magical means as a purely mental act. So paralyzed means you drop like a stone.. period.

I disagree that it is necessarily the logical conclusion. Take, for instance, a paraplegic who is paralyzed from the waste down because of an injury to the spinal column. The injury doesn't necessarily affect the motor centers of the brain, those may well be perfectly intact. Paralysis occurs because the signal from the brain to the extremities is interrupted somewhere along its course, not necessarily at the brain center. An injury to the brain's motor control center could certainly result in total or partial paralysis, but the injury doesn't have to be there.

If you then generalize that reality to the magical fantasy of the game, then you could reasonably conclude that during paralysis, the brain could still attempt to send movement signals to the body, but the signals are simply blocked by the magic (or poison, or whatever caused the paralysis, such as a ghoul's touch). As such, the CONCENTRATION equivalent of walking is still there, and the body under a Fly spell might still be able to move in a limited fashion, since the propulsion is from the magic, not from physical effort. That, of course, is assuming the Fly spell was already active when the paralysis occurred. You would not be able to make a Reflex save, nor would you be able to add you Dex bonus to Fly skill checks, but otherwise, you should be able to move in limited fashion.

I don't know that anyone is saying it isn't a reasonable conclusion.

I know I'm saying it isn't a mechanically sound one. The rules just don't state it is a purely mental action, so it doesn't get a pass on the Paralyze mechanic. That the spell itself refers to a

...

My stance doesn't depend on physical skills, but for the spell to refer back to a skill based on statistic used pretty much exclusively in game for physical actions, shows rather clear intent.

There are spells and abilities that are published and in the same book, as well as others more recently, which are explicitly listed as being controlled or used as mental actions. So I'm not quite sure how you are trying to cast the argument being made as "unpublished" or that I'm making things up. Which is exactly what you are implying me doing, masked in a rather wordy around the way fashion it seems.

We have material listed as mental actions.

Fly doesn't have that explicit designation unlike various other published items.

How can that be confusing?

Or are you legitimately stating that the explicit wording for those items is superfluous and means nothing? If so, I guess that would be why we're having this discussion.


He he! 42 Posts on this page, and NONE of them have been selected as "Favorites"!

This topic should probably die now...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fergie wrote:

He he! 42 Posts on this page, and NONE of them have been selected as "Favorites"!

This topic should probably die now...

What does that have to do with the price of beans sold in China?


I devoted 9 entire minutes to reading posts in this thread, so forgive me for throwing a compromise out there.

Since fly doesn't specify whether it is purely mental, purely physical, or a combination of the two, why not allow the character to fly as long as no Fly checks are required, but fail any Fly skill checks?

...

On a vaguely-related note, why doesn't common sense tell you that if you have Str 0 or Dex 0, or are otherwise incapable of movement, that you automatically fail movement-related skill checks? (As a general rule... then add exceptions as needed for fly or telekinesis or etc.)

I know, I know... how dare I offer a middle ground... but I'm sure someone will try to correct me soon enough...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Joe Mashuga wrote:
I devoted 9 entire minutes to reading posts in this thread, so forgive me for throwing a compromise out there.

Heresy

/cevah


Cevah wrote:
Joe Mashuga wrote:
I devoted 9 entire minutes to reading posts in this thread, so forgive me for throwing a compromise out there.

Heresy

/cevah

This thread=

And they built it right over those two stubborn Zax; and left them there, standing un-budged in their tracks.


Deadbeat Doom wrote:
Cevah wrote:
Joe Mashuga wrote:
I devoted 9 entire minutes to reading posts in this thread, so forgive me for throwing a compromise out there.

Heresy

/cevah

This thread=

And they built it right over those two stubborn Zax; and left them there, standing un-budged in their tracks.

Self-righteous, know-it-all, and exceeding "useful" comments like yours=

PG


Skylancer4 wrote:
Deadbeat Doom wrote:
Cevah wrote:
Joe Mashuga wrote:
I devoted 9 entire minutes to reading posts in this thread, so forgive me for throwing a compromise out there.

Heresy

/cevah

This thread=

And they built it right over those two stubborn Zax; and left them there, standing un-budged in their tracks.

Self-righteous, know-it-all, and exceeding "useful" comments like yours=

PG

Best characters in the show, thanks!


The things people take pride in... I keep arguing with my friends, but modern civilization really is doomed :-(

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Having just entered this hellscape of a thread, I really only glossed it, looking most heavily at the first page and this page. I think we're letting our love of banal minutia get to us and are trying to argue for something that when you get right down to it, is not a matter of "can you?", but really is "should you?"

As in, should a character get a benefit of having the paralyzed condition placed on them? In this case, some are arguing for the paralyzed condition to grant the effects of the Hover feat for free, or a pass a Fly 15 check without rolling. If a munchkin-y, game-breaking PC is suffering serious Dex penalties, whether it be from poison or whatever, and is flying, should his GM grant his request to somehow allow him to paralyze himself (assuming he has the means to somehow) in order to avoid plummeting to the ground?

401 to 450 of 573 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / What penalties for a paralyzed creature using a fly spell? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.