|
So, in order to know if I can Take 10 on the skill check, it is necessary to know what spell is being cast (fireball or prestidigitation)... but I can't know what spell is being cast without the skill check. Sounds like I have to defer to the judge to me. In other words, "Depends on the Judge. (and the situation) YMMV." (IMHO)
The GM has to determine it based on what the spell is. (And the situation it is used in.) So yes, based on the spell.
|
So...you can always ask to Take 10, and if the GM says "yes" you know it's a harmless spell even if you fail to identify it?
Seems...odd.
You're identifying before the spell is finished, so at that moment there is no danger. In fact, if you don't like the answer, you could take an AoO and prevent the spell from ever being completed.
|
You're identifying before the spell is finished, so at that moment there is no danger.
No. There might be danger.
You don't know.
The DM does.
If the 3 seconds it takes the guy sitting under your table to finish casting the fireball isn't immediate danger you have completely rules lawyered the term into non existance. You can't just keep dividing time into an infinite individual steps and say "Well its not now so it's not immediate". I'm sorry, but the arrow does hit the target xena.
In fact, if you don't like the answer, you could take an AoO and prevent the spell from ever being completed.
Which invites an AOO from the DM for metagaming, the same as starting to buff the second you see a map out when you've been walking through the woods for 4 days straight.
|
|
That is also where I draw the line. Which depends on the spell.
I'm trying to parse what you mean by this.
If the spellcasting is the triggering event for combat, the check to identify the spell would be an interrupt to the spellcasting, and so happen before combat started, and so Take 10 would be allowed.
In any other case, combat has either started or not started, and Take 10 would depend on that.
In none of these cases does the content of the spell matter.
|
|
I'd still personally draw the line at "are we in initiative or not" not at "what are the results of the spell".1)In immediate danger is a seperate clause
2) Awareness is determined before initiative is rolled.
My understanding is that what is important is the characters *perception* of immediate danger. A character who is not aware of their immediate danger does not have their mental faculties impeded in a way that prevents them from taking 10.
Or in other words, it doesn't bother you until *after* you identify it as a fireball.
|
|
If the spellcasting is the triggering event for combat...
...then combat has already started and Take 10 is unavailable.
If the spell is not starting combat, Take 10 is available.
Thus, it depends on what spell is being cast. Being able to interrupt the spell with an AoO is irrelevant, as combat has already been determined.
|
|
If the spellcasting is triggering combat then you've already rolled initiative, decided on who is in a surprise round, and luckily the spellcaster goes first and is able to cast their spell.
Otherwise the spellcasting that is triggering combat wont actually have happened for a few people's turn in the combat.
I'd probably rule is that the spellcraft would allow you to get into the surprise round, thus allowing take 10 as it's before combat, same as how I allow perception to take 10 to determine surprise round normally.
|
|
Yeah, it's just a perception roll.
Combat is initiative.
Immediate danger, if I did nothing for the length of the taskx2 would I be injured. SO a static pit, no, thus jumping with take 10 is okay.
now add a boulder rolling at you, yes it's danger, boulder would hit you in length of the taskx2. No take 10.
distraction are things like unaccustomed bad weather, someone actively trying to distract you, or doing 2 things at once.
Since the surprise awareness is before combat, and not distracted that leave immediate danger.
Now yes if you did nothing then you'd be in danger so it's not an auto-allow. But since nothing outside of the source of the check is causing immediate danger, you get the go ahead. Thus letting you decide if you were you chilling in the pub and make a roll, or if you were kinda scanning about with an average vigilance using take 10.
|
Of course, since the Take 10 rules are so rarely used around the games I play, it's not surprising that the idea hasn't come up.
I have a dream of getting my "totally a role-playing character" up to level 17 where he can take the Perfect Center meditation feat and take 10 on everything.
I'll just hand the GM a list of skills with a number beside each and say "anytime I need a roll, that's the total."
|
|
If the spellcasting is triggering combat then you've already rolled initiative, decided on who is in a surprise round, and luckily the spellcaster goes first and is able to cast their spell.
Otherwise the spellcasting that is triggering combat wont actually have happened for a few people's turn in the combat.I'd probably rule is that the spellcraft would allow you to get into the surprise round, thus allowing take 10 as it's before combat, same as how I allow perception to take 10 to determine surprise round normally.
Yes, this exactly.
|
|
My understanding is that what is important is the characters *perception* of immediate danger.
Why?
I do not see anything about the characters perception of things in the rules.
This may be the place where I admit that I don't remember rules, I remember systems.
My understanding of the system for Taking 10 is that the thing that keeps you from Taking 10 at all times is stress. The stress of combat or being in danger introduces randomness into what would otherwise be routine tasks for one of your training. So without awareness, you haven't introduced stress and you can blithely continue along Taking 10.
From a rules text standpoint, I guess that would all be subsumed in my interpretation of the meaning of "immediate" in this context, which seems clear to me, but apparently isn't as obvious as I thought.
|
|
Spellcasting, unless concealed in some way, always triggers initiative rolls, because it's a *potentially hostile* action. That solves the issue. I let my players make as many mental skill checks as they want on their turn in initiative order.
PC1
PC2
NPC
PC3
PC4
GM: "The plates have just been set down. We're in initiative because he has closed his eyes, and the air around him seems to be shimmering. You think he's about to cast a spell. PC1:"
PC1: "I draw a shuriken and ready an action to attack if he casts a spell."
(remember that you always get to *choose* whether to take your readied action.)
PC2: "I draw my sword and 5-ft step next to him."
GM: "NPC Begins casting. Spellcraft checks if you wish, before or after you take your op attack, PC2."
PC2: "17"
GM: "It's detect poison."
PC2: "I do not take my op attack, and I say, 'It's nothing.'"
PC1: "13. Did he have time to say, 'It's nothing'?"
GM: "Your actions are essentially happening simultaneously."
PC1: "Sense motive 26. Does he seem hostile?"
GM: "Not particularly, no."
PC1: "I don't take my readied action."
GM: "We can drop out of initiative."
-----
Initiative solves the problem. We have to give the PCs a chance to react to a perceived threat.
Plus, it's kinda like putting out a map when there's not a combat. If they roll now and then when there's no fight, they stop metagaming that initiative = kill mode.
|
|
Initiative solves the problem. We have to give the PCs a chance to react to a perceived threat.Plus, it's kinda like putting out a map when there's not a combat. If they roll now and then when there's no fight, they stop metagaming that initiative = kill mode.
This works fine *until* you have the entire table that has Spellcraft or other means *bomb* the roll to make the determination that the non-hostile and mission/plot-important NPC is casting a trivial spell for their own well-being...
|
|
This works fine *until* you have the entire table that has Spellcraft or other means *bomb* the roll to make the determination that the non-hostile and mission/plot-important NPC is casting a trivial spell for their own well-being...
Initiative solves the problem. We have to give the PCs a chance to react to a perceived threat.Plus, it's kinda like putting out a map when there's not a combat. If they roll now and then when there's no fight, they stop metagaming that initiative = kill mode.
Well, then the PCs learn not to be trigger happy. Honestly, it's a bit like drawing a gun-shaped lighter during a drug deal. Maybe you have a cigarette in your mouth, maybe not, but you're still likely to get shot. Casting willy-nilly is unwise. Perhaps we should have our NPCs announce their well-being spells before they cast them, if alliance hasn't been established.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, then the PCs learn not to be trigger happy. Honestly, it's a bit like drawing a gun-shaped lighter during a drug deal. Maybe you have a cigarette in your mouth, maybe not, but you're still likely to get shot. Casting willy-nilly is unwise. Perhaps we should have our NPCs announce their well-being spells before they cast them, if alliance hasn't been established.This works fine *until* you have the entire table that has Spellcraft or other means *bomb* the roll to make the determination that the non-hostile and mission/plot-important NPC is casting a trivial spell for their own well-being...
Initiative solves the problem. We have to give the PCs a chance to react to a perceived threat.Plus, it's kinda like putting out a map when there's not a combat. If they roll now and then when there's no fight, they stop metagaming that initiative = kill mode.
Most of my PCs do announce that they are about to cast a spell - and what the spell does - when there are NPCs around. Precisely to avoid this kind of misunderstanding.
|
|
... length of the taskx2.Fyi, taking ten does not take twice as long. I think that is a hold over from an old version.
Right, that's my rough rule for determining immediate danger.
if you didn't have time for the check then you can't make the check so nothing matters.If the danger would happen 1 round after the check then it would be to close to call and be considered immediate.
So my rough rule is immediate danger is if something would happen within that time.
|
|
Most of my PCs do announce that they are about to cast a spell - and what the spell does - when there are NPCs around. Precisely to avoid this kind of misunderstanding.Well, then the PCs learn not to be trigger happy. Honestly, it's a bit like drawing a gun-shaped lighter during a drug deal. Maybe you have a cigarette in your mouth, maybe not, but you're still likely to get shot. Casting willy-nilly is unwise. Perhaps we should have our NPCs announce their well-being spells before they cast them, if alliance hasn't been established.This works fine *until* you have the entire table that has Spellcraft or other means *bomb* the roll to make the determination that the non-hostile and mission/plot-important NPC is casting a trivial spell for their own well-being...
Initiative solves the problem. We have to give the PCs a chance to react to a perceived threat.Plus, it's kinda like putting out a map when there's not a combat. If they roll now and then when there's no fight, they stop metagaming that initiative = kill mode.
Don't worry guards, I'm casting prestidigitation to dust off, (proceed to cast charm person)
|
|
... length of the taskx2.Fyi, taking ten does not take twice as long. I think that is a hold over from an old version.Right, that's my rough rule for determining immediate danger.
if you didn't have time for the check then you can't make the check so nothing matters.
If the danger would happen 1 round after the check then it would be to close to call and be considered immediate.
So my rough rule is immediate danger is if something would happen within that time.
Thanks for explaining. I like that logic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The difficulty with spells like Charm Person is that it steals narrative power from the GM. Generally GMs respond by curtailing the power of the spell to make it less effective.
Does one automatically detect an invisible caster casting a silent spell?
Thank you for demonstrating to us the stupidity of these manifestations! That is a real valable question I think!
|
Just late coming into this weird, wild charm person thread.
I cast it, you fail, than were making a ton of opposed charisma checks. You fail them (because if I play a Charm anything caster I'm investing in charisma bonus gear.) And your jumping into that pool of acid for me buddy, because it looks like water and that's what bros do.
|
|
Just late coming into this weird, wild charm person thread.
I cast it, you fail, than were making a ton of opposed charisma checks. You fail them (because if I play a Charm anything caster I'm investing in charisma bonus gear.) And your jumping into that pool of acid for me buddy, because it looks like water and that's what bros do.
Thats suggestion. Charm person doesn't interfere with their senses. Nor is an opposed charisma check total domination.
"ha ha ha! Eyup! it sure does look refresshing.. a pit of acid. You kill me buddy!"
|
|
Norse,
It doesn't effect their senses, but one of the older versions of the game had that as splat text. Also, read the Charisma check. It makes people do things they normally wouldn't do with an opposed Charisma check.
Hey that's really bad smelling fizzy water. Go swimming bro. "But I uh" no bro, bro your going to go swimming /wins Charisma check. "Uh, ah.. ok? Cannon ball?"
|
|
Norse,
Also, read the Charisma check.It makes people do things they normally wouldn't do with an opposed Charisma check.
no, YOU read it.
See how that works?
Hey that's really bad smelling fizzy water.
Charm person does not say, hint, suggest, or in any way shape or form imply that it's capable of making the target think that one thing is another. That's suggestion. Your friend is telling you that the acid is refreshing. Your friend is either mistaken (so you don't let him near it) , or making a joke (he has the best sense of humor!) but even a depressed orc has better things to do than hop in an acid tub.
The example given is get an orc to plow a field for you, not kill themselves
From the FAQ For example, if you use charm person to befriend an orc, the orc might share his grog with you and talk with you about the upcoming raid on a nearby settlement. If you asked him to help you fight some skeletons, he might very well lend a hand. If you asked him to help you till a field, however, you might need to make that check to convince him to do it.
The main thing to remember about
charm magic is that it is not a compulsion (that is a
different subschool of enchantment), which means
it doesn’t directly force someone to do
something. Instead, the spell basically
makes someone feel like the caster is a
friend, and puts what the caster says in
the best possible light. Just like in the
Diplomacy section of Skills in Conf lict
(see page 184), being someone’s friend
doesn’t mean the caster gets to
dictate everything they do, and
even the opposed Charisma check
the spell grants can only go so far;
it doesn’t compel them to act exactly
as the caster desires.
For instance, an evil necromancer
might be willing to allow her friend
to sit as her new right hand, but she
won’t quit her entire life’s goal just
because a friend asked, even with
an opposed Charisma check. This
advice applies equally as well to other
charm spells (such as charm animal and
charm monster).
