The rules for combat in aquatic terrain state:
Characters swimming, floating, or treading water on the surface, or wading in water at least chest deep, have improved cover (+8 bonus to AC, +4 bonus on Reflex saves) from opponents on land. Land-bound opponents who have freedom of movement effects ignore this cover when making melee attacks against targets in the water. A completely submerged creature has total cover against opponents on land unless those opponents have freedom of movement effects. Magical effects are unaffected except for those that require attack rolls (which are treated like any other effects) and fire effects.
Does this mean that, unless I am benefiting from freedom of movement, if I am standing on the shoreline, I cannot jab a spear down to strike a fish swimming in the water, because it is "completely submerged" and thus has total cover?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lightning bolts and bombs work well... Fishing with a grenade is just fun!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You don't spear-fish from the shore, generally, but from standing in the water.
Which would work fine.
EDIT: Indeed doing some cursory research I can't find a single reference to spear fishing that isn't from either a boat, standing in the water, or diving under the water.
That doesn't appear to be a thing that ever occurs. Or ever did.
Probably because any fish that come near enough to the shore aren't worth using a spear on, but the fact remains that you're complaining that something literally nobody ever does is impossible.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are correct. It is near impossible to spear fish in Pathfinder. It is also impossible to break a leg when falling, to kill someone with unarmed attacks or for a normal person to see something somewhat small further than about 300 ft. away.
Irony aside, the rules should never be seen as a completely accurate reflection of the internal logic of the game world. Contrary to (somewhat) popular belief, Pathfinder is not a simulationistic game.
Why is it impossible to kill someone with unarmed attacks?
You can choose an unarmed strike to do lethal damage.
I'm slightly bored, a bit tiered and not paying enough attention. I should probably stop answering threads for the evening. Of course it is possible.
My point still stands though. And the fact that you can chose to deal lethal or non-lethal damage with your attacks actually adds to that. Imagine if that was true for real life. The number of involuntary manslaughter incidents would be pretty low, I believe, and the US police would have a much better reputation.
I don't get why standing on the shore and having Freedom of Movement helps with attacking someone in the water. That is a stupid addition to a rule.
Makes perfect sense to me.
"The spell also allows the subject to move and attack normally while underwater, even with slashing weapons such as axes and swords or with bludgeoning weapons such as flails, hammers, and maces, provided that the weapon is wielded in the hand rather than hurled."
Once your weapon hits the water, you can attack creatures normally with it instead of the "total cover". Your weapon is underwater, or it couldn't hit a submerged creature, so being able to "attack normally while underwater" applies.
Wait. If I am in a boat, I don't count as being "on land" for the purposes of hitting a creature in the water below me? What about if I'm on a pier? Does that count as "land"?
Wait. If I am in a boat, I don't count as being "on land" for the purposes of hitting a creature in the water below me? What about if I'm on a pier? Does that count as "land"?
I'm PRETTY sure, non-water location are counted as "land". So boat, pier, ect = land.
The rule has 3 locations:
1) swimming, floating, or treading water on the surface, or wading in water at least chest deep
2) land
3) completely submerged
So to use the rule, and attack creatures in water, you need to be either 1, 2 or 3.
Right. That's what I figured.
It still seems like a weird rule to me. I mean, I get it's hard attacking submerged creatures, but I feel like cover when partially submerged and improved cover when completely submerged would make more sense, as opposed to improved cover when partially submerged and total cover when completely submerged.
That might just be me though.
Yeah, it's stuff like that I'm thinking about. I get that water isn't the ideal medium for a projectile to travel through, but by having it grant total cover the rules are basically saying a few feet of H20 constitutes an Impenetrable Shield of Attack Negation +10.
swoosh: The target doesn't have total cover however as you have the freedom of movement effect. Remember, we're talking about the Freedom of Movement part of the rule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pfff... This is nothing!
If you imerse yourself on the water up to your waist, more than 50% of your body is out of sight, therefore, you gain cover and/or concealment, therefore you're actually harder to hit than if you were standing on solid ground and able to move freely! XD
Huh. So, if I am standing completely still, aiming for a minute, and fire my crossbow at someone in the water, I better hope I am wearing my freedom of movement...ring...?
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe this was part of my silly answer to the naked 20th level fighter "discussion" a while back - all he had to do was submerge himself in his bathtub and *boom* immune to attacks.
Sometime rules don't model reality very well. See also falling and lava.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Huh. So, if I am standing completely still, aiming for a minute, and fire my crossbow at someone in the water, I better hope I am wearing my freedom of movement...ring...?
And count yourself lucky! I he had buried himself in the ground up to his waist, your ring would be useless! XD
The snarky answer is that spear fishing is likely a function of the Survival skill (to gather food) and not a function of the combat mechanics.
The non-snarky answer is that hunting fish for food isn't something you need to use combat rounds to adjudicate, but the appropriate skill, which would either be Profession:Fishing or Survival.
Spear Fishing shares one attribute with pole fishing. It's a process that takes a lot longer than a few seconds.
swoosh: The target doesn't have total cover however as you have the freedom of movement effect. Remember, we're talking about the Freedom of Movement part of the rule.Yeah I know, but that doesn't make it any more sensical. You have freedom of movement cast on you, so suddenly you can shoot your gun at someone less than a foot underwater 200 feet away when before you couldn't. It's weird.
In the list of things that could make more sense, this ranks pretty low.
As to freedom of movement making it easier to attack things in water, well yeah that's part of the spell. It also lets me use a mace in water too or sling into water because that's what the spell does. Magic does all kinds of "weird" stuff and this barely makes the "weird" chart.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why is it impossible to kill someone with unarmed attacks?
You can choose an unarmed strike to do lethal damage.I'm slightly bored, a bit tiered and not paying enough attention. I should probably stop answering threads for the evening. Of course it is possible.
My point still stands though. And the fact that you can chose to deal lethal or non-lethal damage with your attacks actually adds to that. Imagine if that was true for real life. The number of involuntary manslaughter incidents would be pretty low, I believe, and the US police would have a much better reputation.
Not really, non-lethal damage in PF can still kill. Roll a crit on a level 1 NPC with 4 hp and an 8 con and you might very well kill him.
Spear Fishing shares one attribute with pole fishing. It's a process that takes a lot longer than a few seconds.But all of that time beyond a few seconds consists of readying an action to stab any tasty looking fish that comes in reach.
*yawn* That's why you train your bear the Hunt trick so they can use their "natural stalking or foraging instincts to find food".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because I wouldn't want to slow down the pace of the game too much, I'd just have the player make a Survival check. You succeed, you have a fish on a stick.
The fact that magical effects can pass through the water/air boundary without any problems makes me think that DMs who feel like being oppressive should probably use more underwater casters.
The fact that magical effects can pass through the water/air boundary without any problems makes me think that DMs who feel like being oppressive should probably use more underwater casters.
I once made my players fight a river troll sorcerer! XD