The Oracle's "Erase From Time" special ability provides:
Erase from Time (Su): As a melee touch attack, you can temporarily remove a creature from time altogether. The target creature must make a Fortitude save or vanish completely for a number of rounds equal to 1/2 your oracle level (minimum 1 round). No magic or divinations can detect the creature during this time, as it exists outside of time and space—in effect, the creature ceases to exist for the duration of this ability. At the end of the duration, the creature reappears unharmed in the space it last occupied (or the nearest possible space, if the original space is now occupied). You can use this ability once per day, plus one additional time per day at 11th level.
Also relevant:
Supernatural Abilities (Su): Using a supernatural ability is usually a standard action (unless defined otherwise by the ability's description). Its use cannot be disrupted, does not require concentration, and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Two questions that came up at the gaming table:
(1) If the oracle attempts a melee touch attack but misses, can she try again? That is, can she hold the charge as if it is a touch spell? Or is the ability's one use per day (or 2 after 11th level) discharged when the oracle makes a touch attack, successful or not?
(2) Second, assuming the Erase From Time attack can be re-attempted, and because it is described as a "melee touch attack," does that mean that a high level (or hasted) oracle with multiple attacks and using the full attack action can attempt multiple times in a single round?
Thanks very much for your help! I need to make a final ruling on this before we return to the gaming table tonight!
You only hold charges on touch spells, so Su abilities are out of luck. (The rules talk about spells, and Su abilities lack the rules text saying they behave like spells unless otherwise noted.)
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Whether or not a miss negates the ability is a GM ruling. There are no examples of an assumption that the charge will be held, but there also isn't language about what happens on a miss.
You definitely couldn't do this ability multiple times in a round, as each time requires a standard action.
Thanks for your thoughts. As to the multiple attempts in one round, the PC's argument is that SU description says the SU ability is a standard action "unless defined otherwise by the ability's description" -- he argues the description "as a melee touch attack" means the ability description says it is NOT a standard action, but instead an attack action which can be multiplied on a full attack.
As to whether the charge can be held, I'd love more thoughts. Can anyone think of other comparable SU special abilities, and whether in those situations there can be a re-try on a miss?
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
he argues the description "as a melee touch attack" means the ability description says it is NOT a standard action, but instead an attack action which can be multiplied on a full attack.
Unless otherwise specified is the language such as "as a free action" used in some abilities.
I'd agree to allow it as a part of a full attack, but since you can't hold the charge it's not overly powerful.
So, if I'm understanding correctly, you agree that a 12th level oracle could expend both uses of the ability in one round during a full attack, with each use counting as one melee attack. But you don't think the charge can be held -- you think a missed touch attack expends the use of the ability for the day. Could you explain your thinking on that latter point? I tend to agree, but my PC disagrees strongly.
How would other GMs rule on this at their table, and why?
Thanks!
For a once/day ability, I'd allow the charge to be held like a touch spell. With a fort save and attack roll, holding the charge hardly seems unbalancing.
Though if that's the case, the only way to deliver the charge in subsequent rounds with an attack is with unarmed or natural attacks against regular AC.
For a once/day ability, I'd allow the charge to be held like a touch spell. What a fort save and attack roll, holding the charge hardly seems unbalancing.
Though if that's the case, the only way to deliver the charge in subsequent rounds with an attack is with unarmed or natural attacks against regular AC.
Why against regular AC?
It is a standard action to use, so you can't take multiple attack actions in that round, so no multiple attempts.
From a RAW standpoint you cannot hold the charge. It's not a spell or even a Spell-like. You "use" a standard action that activates this ability. Part of this activation is the melee touch attack. It gives 2 chances to resist (attack roll and save) because success is pretty devastating.
In my game, I might allow a player to attempt again on the next turn, but I would still require the use of a standard action. This is a none RAW or RAI answer, but a GM houserule. Still no on "full-attack" iterative attempts.
|
My thought process went something like:
Holding a charge is a function of touch spells.
Spells take a standard action to activate.
This is not a spell-like ability.
This takes less than a standard action to activate.
Furthermore, as a touch attack, it is easier to hit than an attack on AC.
As battle-changing as this ability can be, I'm inclined to make the rolls count. Holding the charge makes this just a little too powerful for my taste. In my opinion, it should require two successful rolls (attack and failed Fort save) to pull off.
That's all just opinion and table feeling. Even a round or two without the BBEG can allow for healing and buffs and repositioning to turn a fight. It's not an auto-win, but it could come close.
In addition, it also be handy to use defensively. You auto hit allies and they can fail their Fort saves. It can come in handy to delay a poison or protect an NPC. Much less game changing this way.
Why against regular AC?For a once/day ability, I'd allow the charge to be held like a touch spell. What a fort save and attack roll, holding the charge hardly seems unbalancing.
Though if that's the case, the only way to deliver the charge in subsequent rounds with an attack is with unarmed or natural attacks against regular AC.
Based on how holding a touch spell works. You could still use a standard action to make a single touch attack, though.
For clarity, that's just how I would do it. The rules don't really say either way. I tend to play the game pretty loosely anyway. Fun is most important.
This takes less than a standard action to activate.
Ah, here's some of the contention, I suppose. It still looks like a standard action to me.
|
|
Ah, here's some of the contention, I suppose. It still looks like a standard action to me.This takes less than a standard action to activate.
If I restricted it to a standard action, I would consider allowing a held charge. Probably not, though.
I allow it as an attack action mostly because it says "as an attack" and because allowing it doesn't really change anything or make it super. I don't see an oracle's iterative attack as particularly powerful.
Thanks, folks. I may invite my PC to weigh in since the consensus seems to be running against him. I do like to avoid or brush over these kinds of tricky rules decisions when they come up, because they can grind things to a halt. But the battle-changing effect of this ability made it kind of impossible to make a ruling on the fly and move on...
the only way to deliver the charge in subsequent rounds with an attack is with unarmed or natural attacks against regular AC.
Why against regular AC?
Based on how holding a touch spell works. You could still use a standard action to make a single touch attack, though.
By the way, where in the rules does it say subsequent attacks with a touch spell are against regular AC?
Thanks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to hold the charge on things like this. I mean, yeah, RAW you can't, but think about it. (As a small note, don't things that expire the first time you miss generally state that this is so?)
It's a once per day ability (until a high level), gained through a revelation no less, that doesn't even permanently kill the creature.
Having it save against the ability is much more acceptable than your entire revelation choice ruined by your own roll.
I have no problem allowing the charge to be held, mainly because the cool factor of choosing such niche options like this one make me feel obliged to at least give it a chance.
I have no problem allowing the charge to be held, mainly because the cool factor of choosing such niche options like this one make me feel obliged to at least give it a chance.
And what do you think about the multiple attempts in one round? I could see letting one or the other slide in the PC's direction, but both seems a little much (holding plus multiple attempts in one round). I hear you about the cool factor, but it is a very powerful mystery in several ways, and this is a battle-changing effect, so I'm not sure I see the logic in bending the rules too much in its favor when there is nothing suggesting it can be held. To say it can be held essentially removes one of the two contingencies on the powerful effect, since an eventual hit is guaranteed (and touch attacks aren't too hard usually).
You misunderstand, I'm talking about delivering a spell with iterative attacks.
Scroll down to "Holding the charge." Should be much clearer after that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would hold it to the standard action, honestly, along with the stipulation that if you cast another spell, the charge goes away.
Yeah, when the oracle does get it off, it'll be powerful.
But until then? Have fun with your "wasted turn".
It always seemed more fun to me to use this ability on friendlies, like a weird escape tactic or protection. Not common, though.
You misunderstand, I'm talking about delivering a spell with iterative attacks.
Scroll down to "Holding the charge." Should be much clearer after that.
I'm sorry that I'm being a bit thick-headed -- I don't understand why the iterative attacks would be against normal AC instead of touch AC (assuming there could be subsequent attempts). If the first try is an unarmed melee touch attack, wouldn't the subsequent ones be as well?
Which part of this clarifies the issue?
Holding the Charge: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren't considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack normally doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.
|
|
You misunderstand, I'm talking about delivering a spell with iterative attacks.
Scroll down to "Holding the charge." Should be much clearer after that.
Pretty sure you are wrong about this one.
If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round.
I ruled that an Erase From Time attack cannot be retried, but it only uses a single melee attack so that a high level oracle can attempt a second use of the ability in the same round in a full attack. The PC accepted the decision and the second attempt ALMOST worked.
An interesting analogy is the Inquisitor level 20 "final judgment" ability. There the inquisitor needs to hit and then the target gets a save. It seems clear that regardless of whether the inquisitor hits or not, one of the inquisitor's daily judgments is consumed in the attempt. By analogy, one of the oracle's daily Erase From Time uses is consumed in an attempt, even if the touch attack misses. I imagine that the inquistors and oracles are summoning their magic or juju or whatever as they strike out, and the magic or juju or whatever is consumed in the effort.
Can the oracle use this power on herself, as a sort of desperation move?