|
So what I gather from these six pages of discussion is that:
A good Con score helps, but is not necessary Likewise, a low Con score is unwanted but not terrible, especially for some builds and playstyles Crits are deadly. There are crits where a better Con score would not have made a difference Crits are not the only ways to die Live and learn, am I right?
You forgot:
Failing a save vs. Stinking Cloud is extremely annoying.
Especially when the dc is so low you only fail on a result of 1. +25 bonus but nooooo.
*quiet Seeker rage*
Oh god, the "it's okay guys, I can't possibly fail this on anything but a one......... why did I say that."
|
Oh yeah. "I have a +40 to that save. I'm not worried... crap... you can't auto fail saves, right? Please tell me you can't auto fail saves..."
"Sorry Eric, but a one does fail saves."
"But... +40, shouldn't that make me immune to poison by default?"
"Nope."
"... what the hell?"
"Sorry Eric."
"But... it's just a stupid goblin, how the hell does a goblin manage to poison me to death?!"
"That... I'm not sure of. Maybe you should stop using that die? It did just roll eight natural ones in a row."
The names have been changed, but the exchange I have had occur in a campaign.
|
|
And why I bought a character folio before one PFS session. Mind you, I keep forgetting I have a folio reroll. But it has saved the life of a character or two. More often then not though, it ensures a little more gold on the chronicle. Usually. When the 2nd Day Job roll doesn't bomb worse then the first one.
|
|
Yeah, can't always tell when you'd be better off using your reroll. Is that missed attack the one that will be critical to hit with? Is this the save you really need to make? Is blowing that Knowledge check something that will be detrimental to the party's chance of survival? Is there a trap there and you just couldn't find it with your roll of 12, or is the door actually trap free? Can't always tell.
|
Yeah, a cloudkill is a cloudkill. Just because you have eight castings stacked in the same place doesn't make cloudkill more deadly then it already was.NOWWWW... if they have all the avenues of escape covered with different layers it could become *exceptionally* difficult to get out of the area of effect... of course.
Necklace of Adaptation makes the whole thing null. I love that item for builds that don't have required neck slot items. Either that or toss an Iridescent Spindle Ioun Stone above your head.
|
Necklace of Adaptation makes the whole thing null. I love that item for builds that don't have required neck slot items.
Wait... what build doesn't have a required neck slot? Pretty much every character needs to get an AoNA. A weapon-using qinggong/Umonk with barkskin? That's all I can think of off the top of my head.
|
Necklace of Adaptation makes the whole thing null. I love that item for builds that don't have required neck slot items.Wait... what build doesn't have a required neck slot? Pretty much every character needs to get an AoNA. A weapon-using qinggong/Umonk with barkskin? That's all I can think of off the top of my head.
Druids can use their own Barkskin which is often better.
Rear liners that are not in the armor class race leave it open.
|
|
Necklace of Adaptation makes the whole thing null. I love that item for builds that don't have required neck slot items.Wait... what build doesn't have a required neck slot? Pretty much every character needs to get an AoNA. A weapon-using qinggong/Umonk with barkskin? That's all I can think of off the top of my head.
I've never seen an Amulet of Natural Armor as a required thing for any build. Generally speaking unless you're building an AC monster, the money is better spent elsewhere unless you're on the cusp of your level's AC break-point.
Qinggong Zen Archer doesn't require any neck slot item. Mine wears a Necklace of Adaptation. He has a Swarmbane in his Haversack; you know, for when you need a rodent kebab...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves.
Since each round of exposure to cloudkill seems to be an independent event (not affected by the save success in the previous round) it is reasonable to say that if multiple cloudkills are active, their effects stack. That should not mean multiple saves, but it can mean the save is increased by +2 for each additional "dose" of the poison you are exposed to each round. Having eight going on at the same time would therefore boost the save DC by +14. A single save would ignore the effects however. Increasing the duration does not seem to work in this case since (1) the spell has a finite duration, and (2) the poison effects seem to be round by round independently rather than an ongoing effect like a "normal" poison.
This would seem to be a more "fair" way to adjudicate multiple cloudkills in the same area. Certainly moreso than forcing separate saves for each one each round.
|
|
Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves.** spoiler omitted **
This is already handled by the rules.
"Combining Magic Effects"...
"Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies."
Two cloudkill spells can exist in the same space at the same time, but only one of them will hold the conjured poison in existence in the joined area. They simply do not stack.
But, a black tentacles could setup shop in the same area.
But, if you move from one area affected by a cloudkill to a seperate cloudkill spell's area then you will be affected by the new cloudkill at that time. It is just that for the joined area the lesser version(like lower DC) is suppressed by the strongest version.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And an equally compelling argument can be made that the Poison rules are more specific in this case than the general spell rules and since cloudkill is a poison effect they would take precedence.
I am not going to argue that this is the "right" adjudication, just that it is a reasonable one given the rules. The same can be said for them not stacking at all given the spell rules. I just think that allowing them all to function at the same time and independently of each other is the least desirable and least supported by the rules.
YMMV
|
|
Necklace of Adaptation makes the whole thing null. I love that item for builds that don't have required neck slot items.Wait... what build doesn't have a required neck slot? Pretty much every character needs to get an AoNA. A weapon-using qinggong/Umonk with barkskin? That's all I can think of off the top of my head.I've never seen an Amulet of Natural Armor as a required thing for any build. Generally speaking unless you're building an AC monster, the money is better spent elsewhere unless you're on the cusp of your level's AC break-point.
Qinggong Zen Archer doesn't require any neck slot item. Mine wears a Necklace of Adaptation. He has a Swarmbane in his Haversack; you know, for when you need a rodent kebab...
I disagree entirely - everyone should have a decent enough AC that they aren't hit by every iterative. All of my casters try to stick close to the classic 15+level. Light mithril shields make it pretty easy.
As to your Zen Archer - I specifically mentioned weapon-using qinggong as an exception to the rule.
Druids can use their own Barkskin which is often better.
True - but most of them I've seen get an AoMF to make their wildshape better. So - I'll put down a caster-based druid & weapon-using monk as the 2 exceptions.
|
|
Cloudkill is also a Conjuration (creation) spell, which means that it's conjuring up an actual, physical cloud of poison, for what that's worth.
With regards to the Amulet of Natural Armor - Add a Bomber Alchemist to that list, as they have access to Bearskin as well, and they don't need the Amulet of Mighty Fists.
|
|
I disagree entirely - everyone should have a decent enough AC that they aren't hit by every iterative
Most things you face in the dungeon Don't use iterative attacks, so there's little reason in trying to aim your AC at getting missed by them.
It does require a plan for not taking more than one "thing moves up and hits you"
|
|
Yeah, my Sorcerer gave up on trying to keep his AC relevant. At some point, the cost to get an extra +1 just wasn't worth it, as I'd still get hit all the time anyway. But by that point, Displacement and Improved Invisibility were options (or Mirror Images or Blur earlier). If something with Arcane Sight or True Seeing or something similar targets me, there's always Dimension Door. I think at level 14 now, he's running around after Mage Armor with an AC in the high teens. It's not because he wants to get hit. It would have just cost me too much to add another 10 onto that and get to the point where it would matter. I think I did eventually sell off either his amulet or his ring of protection.
EDIT: I should add, with Shield and Protection from Evil (now that he doesn't have a Ring of Protection), he can boost AC to the mid-20s against most things. So it's far from completely tanking AC. It just wasn't worth the gold to keep boosting the amulet.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
It's not compelling at all, much less equally. If there is no poison there is no question of how the poison is affecting someone. The area of effect stacking takes place first and foremost before there is any poison to check rules on.
While it is a conjuration spell with no SR, the magic still holds the poison in existence, which the lesser of the two spells can not do due to the rule I quoted.It is not a matter of 'which of the two poisons in the air is the one affecting me' it is a matter of 'which of the two spells has conjured the poison into this air'.
|
|
everyone should have a decent enough AC that they aren't hit by every iterativeArmor!?! What a silly soft-skinned pinky you are. A real Ulfen warrior needs no armor. My anger fuels me*.
At what level? At high levels there are certainly things which could easily do that in a single round. Even if you have DR, you better hope you don't run into a monk with pummeling. (Flurry of misses wouldn't apply.) Or an archer with clustered shot for that matter.
|
|
At what level?
12, also with DR5/- and things like Hard to Kill. The character has never worn any armor improvements of anykind and only "forced" to take the occasional dodge bonus from hast. His schtick is to withstand pain, rather than avoid it. Kind of an ultra-macho wilderness barbarian attitude.
Monks with maximized flurry and optimized archers with cluster shot are few and far between in Paizo products, especially scenarios. Besides, if they can do more than 232 HP of damage in a single round, it is likely only a PC focused on defending specifically against the enemy's attack is going to more than mitigate the danger. There is always an enemy out there that can do things you cannot defend against or at least only minimally.In reaching level 12, he has only died and required a post-session raise once and that was waaay back in mid-levels. Since then he has been the recipient of roughly 3-4 breath of life, all paid for by himself except for the one the life oracle gave me for free during the session. Thanks dude! Well, actually it was a woman, so Thanks Dudette! ;-)
the point being, he has fared about the same as his more heavily armored companions and considering he is usually expected to rush in and kill things when the "talkers" fail, he has done very well. He was most satisfied when he out-knowledged the bard on a knowledge check once. :-P
Cloudkill is also a Conjuration (creation) spell, which means that it's conjuring up an actual, physical cloud of poison, for what that's worth.
** spoiler omitted **
With regards to the Amulet of Natural Armor - Add a Bomber Alchemist to that list, as they have access to Bearskin as well, and they don't need the Amulet of Mighty Fists.
The spell doesn't say that the cloud conjured by Cloudkill is a "poison." All I see is a description, saying that it's a "poisonous cloud" and the [poison] descriptor, but not anything that indicates that it would work in a method similar to Insanity Mist. Compare with Prismatic Spray (Green):
Is there something that I'm missing that says that effects generated by spells with the [poison] descriptor act as Poisons?
|
|
No, I don't think anything in Cloudkill or elsewhere explicitly says it works like poison. Bob is saying it's a reasonable ruling for a GM to make. I was just pointing out that as a Conjuration (creation) spell, there is a physical cloud of poisonous vapors there, so multiple Cloudkills would mean multiple physical clouds of poisonous vapors. I don't know what the implication of that is (if anything). I thought it was worth pointing out, as it might influence how people think about the spell. It's unclear to me that "magic" is holding the cloud together, and that it doesn't just dissipate on its own after 1 min/level.
Still, I'd likely only require a single save, and I wouldn't increase the DC. Depending on where the Cloudkills were cast from, they might spread out to cover a larger area, as they move in a direction away from the caster. I do feel like where Bob is going with it is closer to a house rule than a GM interpretation, but I understand how he's getting to that interpretation. I just wouldn't feel comfortable ruling that way in a PFS game and killing someone's character as a result (as a vastly DC increase Cloudkill could very likely do).
EDIT: It's further worth pointing out that Cloudkill is not Dismissible. That further indicates to me that once the cloud is there, it's there, and a physical thing that has to be dealt with. I think it can still be Dispelled, but I've never really thought about whether Dispel Magic works differently on conjuration spells.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there something that I'm missing that says that effects generated by spells with the [poison] descriptor act as Poisons?
Technically no, but the description does say, "its vapors are yellowish-green and poisonous." Certainly that can be just dismissed as fluff, but that statement is the source of why players use immunities to poison and bonuses to save vs poison against it. One has to decide, either its a poison effect or not. If not, then you should not allow things like an Amulet of Adaptation or a dwarf's poison resistance to work against it. The theory to that would be the magic spell is doing the damage, not a poison. If however, a GM rules that those types of things would work against it, meaning it is in fact a poison (even one magically created), then the poison rules could be applied.
Admittedly this is a situation where multiple rules are inter-mingling in an usual way. I just think that saying there is only one way to adjudicate it given the ambiguity that exists is misleading.|
|
Ok, so I glanced through Dispel Magic, and I also looked at Wall of Stone. I think, since the duration on Wall of Stone is Instantaneous, that a Wall of Stone cannot be Dispelled. But, since the duration of Cloudkill is 1 min/level, it can. If the duration of Cloudkill were Instantaneous, and the description said it dissipates after 1 min/level, then I think it probably couldn't be Dispelled. Anyway, this is a sidetrack. It was just something that never occurred to me.
|
|
Ok, so I glanced through Dispel Magic, and I also looked at Wall of Stone. I think, since the duration on Wall of Stone is Instantaneous, that a Wall of Stone cannot be Dispelled. But, since the duration of Cloudkill is 1 min/level, it can. If the duration of Cloudkill were Instantaneous, and the description said it dissipates after 1 min/level, then I think it probably couldn't be Dispelled. Anyway, this is a sidetrack. It was just something that never occurred to me.
Wall of Stone can not be dispelled, because the magic that created the stone is no longer there. It has already permanently created the stone.
Cloudkill can be dispelled because it has a duration. Which means, though the item is conjured and real, it is only being kept real by an ongoing spell. Making it 'temporarily real'. Thus no SR, but would wink out in an anti-magic field. The magic does not affect those in the cloud, the magic creates and sustains the cloud.
|
|
Is there something that I'm missing that says that effects generated by spells with the [poison] descriptor act as Poisons?Technically no, but the description does say, "its vapors are yellowish-green and poisonous." Certainly that can be just dismissed as fluff, but that statement is the source of why players use immunities to poison and bonuses to save vs poison against it. One has to decide, either its a poison effect or not. If not, then you should not allow things like an Amulet of Adaptation or a dwarf's poison resistance to work against it. The theory to that would be the magic spell is doing the damage, not a poison. If however, a GM rules that those types of things would work against it, meaning it is in fact a poison (even one magically created), then the poison rules could be applied.
Admittedly this is a situation where multiple rules are inter-mingling in an usual way. I just think that saying there is only one way to adjudicate it given the ambiguity that exists is misleading.
Cause before effect, spell area before conjuration. You must rule on overlapping before you can rule on multiple poisons, as multiple poisons would not be in the area until the spells conjure them(or in the case of rolling into each other, continue to hold the poison in existence). It is not intermingling rules. It is, can two castings of the same spell affect the same area at the same time? If yes, you now have two poisons and must rule on that. But, the rule says no on two castings of the same spell effecting the same area.
|
everyone should have a decent enough AC that they aren't hit by every iterativeArmor!?! What a silly soft-skinned pinky you are. A real Ulfen warrior needs no armor. My anger fuels me*.
I'd guess that you have spent far less on clw/infernal healing than you would have on defense, but that MUST get tedious. I'm imagining 4 other pathfinders whacking you round after round with clw wands.
|
|
same basic stuff
FWIW, my comment was directed at a new participant in the discussion. I am not going to convince you nor you me. You hitting me over the head with the same hammer for a third time is not gonna change my opinion that while I agree your interpretation has merit, it is not the only one.
|
|
I'd guess that you have spent far less on clw/infernal healing than you would have on defense, but that MUST get tedious. I'm imagining 4 other pathfinders whacking you round after round with clw wands.
While I have not "crunched" the gold, I would be willing to bet that my expenses towards healing have been much less than the lost opportunity cost of buying enough armor to mitigate my yoyo hit point totals. Leaves me more money for a bigger hammer...and delicious tea.
FWIW, I do try to keep a wand of cure moderate wounds around. The healers seem to appreciate that. However, I prefer me that wizard healing since it is all natural. Or at least that's what 'dem wizards keep telling me anyway. I prefer my own natural healing over those froo-foo cure spells the silly priests throw around. Although, I have to say that Gozreh has opened my eyes to the wider world of magic created by the trees and all living things. Its like an energy force that surrounds us and penetrates us...it binds the universe together*. Or some such nonsense. Anyway, having sooo many hit points makes me less reliant on healing during combat, although I never turn away aid from my companions. Most seem eager to provide it as I am busy taking all the enemy's attacks in a futile attempt to defeat me. You should see their faces when I let out a war-cry as Gozreh's power surges through me and I grow to the side of a giant. Hehe, it is amusing to say the least.
|
|
same basic stuffFWIW, my comment was directed at a new participant in the discussion. I am not going to convince you nor you me. You hitting me over the head with the same hammer for a third time is not gonna change my opinion that while I agree your interpretation has merit, it is not the only one.
Saying the word interpretation does not make an argument valid. Yours was fundamentally flawed. I pointed it out. You continued to make the argument, I more explicitly outlined the flaw. You are not the only one reading.
So yes, I do not intend to change your mind. It is quite often that, mid-disagreement, either arguing party will not change their minds. But those who listen can, and later after thought the original parties may as well.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As someone else watching the discussion I have to say that I find Bob's argument more compelling. He presented a reason why the situation might be interpreted one way, and you refuted his point with reasons why it should be ruled another way. Since then he made a couple more points, and clarified that this is just an opinion and YMMV. You have basically just said I'm right you're wrong a number of times in response to his posts. This is just my view of the discussion, but I'm currently thinking that making a ruling based on the poison rules makes more sense.
1. Cloudkill conjures a physical cloud of poisonous fumes.
2. The effects are not mitigated by SR as they would if the damage were spell based.
3. The effects ARE mitigated by a Fort save(and in my opinion poison immunity/bonuses vs. poison).
All of this leads me to believe that in this case the rules regarding poisons are the most relevant. 1 save but with an increased DC based on the number of instances to which you are exposed.
That said table variation is something to be avoided if possible in PFS, and I love to see a ruling from the developers.