Yes.
|
The manacles give you the grappled condition? Can you cast teleport?
Manacles are odd because the rules on them are very vague. They don't say they grapple, nor do they say they pin. They only say that they are used to bind someone. Notice that they do not even allow a grapple check to get out, only an escape artist check. Unlike rope which has a grapple DC.
Of course, if you bind someone, they are bound and thus helpless. There's a problem, though. Someone in manacles is assumed to still be able to move. Which is why fetters exist in game. And why barbed fetters are described to be used to secure artisans to tables. But someone grappled can not move.
Rope is simple though. It just gives you the pinned condition.
If your wizard is a conjuration specialist with the teleport sub-school, his Shift ability is a SU power - no concentration necessary.
I would say that you would teleport, but would teleport with manacles in tow.
Dimension door and other teleport like spells typically say something like the caster can take along item. Can indicates that they don't have to. That tells me that you can dimension door out of your clothes if you're so inclined.
Edit:
D Door: "You can bring along objects as long as their weight doesn’t exceed your maximum load."
Teleport: "You can bring along objects as long as their weight doesn’t exceed your maximum load."
That tells me that assuming the item isn't magically cursed you can choose what to bring with you and what to leave.
|
|
Manacles are odd, yes.
I'd say they are equivalent to grapple pinned, the concentration DC equal to the escape artist check.
Maybe V only spells can be cast while manacled.
Su teleort would work.
But really almost all of this is Ask your GM in some way or another.
Sure, you can spot off your own rulings. Personally, I'd like to see some official ones.
Something like this should be a little more clear.
Grapple almost works, but not quite.
I think it would be better is bindings went with you. Due to the fact they are touching you. Thus giving you no choice. This way you can't teleport if your bindings are attached to something heavier than your object limit.
That's certainly an opinion, but I'm almost certain that the designers don't share it.
The rules on designing custom spells specifically single out "escaping bindings and grapples" as a reason -- arguably the primary reason -- to make a spell not include a somatic component:
The advantage of spells that don't require somatic components is they can be cast when bound, grappled, or when both hands are full or occupied, and arcane spell failure doesn't apply. Just as creating silent versions of spells devalues Silent Spell, making non-somatic spells devalues the Still Spell feat. The premise of the game is that most spells require words and gestures, and new spells should stick with that unless the theme of the spell suggests it wouldn't require a somatic component, or it was specifically designed to escape bindings or grapples.
Similarly, spells that require material components are often shut down by the same circumstances ("The advantage of spells that don't require material components is they don't require a spell component pouch (and in the rare circumstance in which if you're grappled, you needn't already have your material components in hand to cast the spell)")
From that, I infer that the various verbal-only teleportation spells are, in fact, specifically designed to get you out of bindings, and so making you unable to teleport when bound is not rules-as-intended. Basically, those spells are designed to be among the few -- often the only -- spells that you can actually cast while chained to a dungeon wall.
Manacles count as equipment using the wrist item slot. So, if you can teleport out of manacles then you can also be teleported out of the rest of your equipment. Imagine someone using Jester's Jaunt to remove all of a character's gear, although technically you'd be removing the character from the gear, with the gear simply not being targeted.
Manacles count as equipment using the wrist item slot. So, if you can teleport out of manacles then you can also be teleported out of the rest of your equipment.
Only if you assume that the choice of whether to bring along equipment rests with the caster, and not with the person being teleported. But since "you" already have the option to take objects or not, the capacity for leaving behind "your" equipment already exists.
(I'd also argue that mundane manacles do not take the wrist slot, any more than wearing a magic ring prevents you from wearing mundane rings, or that wearing a quick runner's shirt prevents you from puling a blazer over it. But that's not really relevant.)
According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.
|
|
According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.
It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit. There is some very circumstantial evidence to say it is possible it could be designed to allow escape from restraints.
Though, read the target line...
"Target you and touched objects or other touched willing creatures"
Targeting is through touch.
According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit.
Though, read the target line...
"Target you and touched objects or other touched willing creatures"Targeting is through touch.
Pathfinder is a rules-inclusive system. The spell itself tells you what you can do. What is unsaid cannot be done. It says "You can bring along objects as long as their weight does not exceed your maximum load." It PERMITS object transport, but does not require it. Further, the existence of Dimensional Shackles, a wondrous item that has Dimensional Anchor constantly trained on the bound implies that escape is ordinarily possible.
According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit.
How is "You can bring along objects as long as their weight doesn’t exceed your maximum load" not explicit?
"Can" is permissive, but not required. If you "can" do something, it is also an explicit statement that you are allowed to choose not to.
|
|
Pathfinder is a rules-intensive system. The spell itself tells you what you can do. What is unsaid cannot be done. It says "You can bring along objects as long as their weight does not exceed your maximum load." It PERMITS object transport, but does not require it. Further, the existence of Dimensional Shackles, a wondrous item that has Dimensional Anchor constantly trained on the bound implies that escape is ordinarily possible.According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit.
Though, read the target line...
"Target you and touched objects or other touched willing creatures"Targeting is through touch.
My whole point here is that it is no where as clear as what you were suggesting. It is arguable both ways with evidence of nearly equal strength. It really is a GM question.
But to your second point... not really, as Dimensional Shackles would prevent someone from escaping captivity through teleportation regardless of whether teleportation allows you to get out of manacles or not. There is no proof of intent in either direction here in regards to the point of contention.
|
|
According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit.How is "You can bring along objects as long as their weight doesn’t exceed your maximum load" not explicit?
"Can" is permissive, but not required. If you "can" do something, it is also an explicit statement that you are allowed to choose not to.
If I say you can teleport x lbs of objects and then tell you you teleport with whatever you are touching... what does that mean?
It means you are going to teleport with what you are touching... but teleportation will fail if you are touching more than x lbs of object. But that you can not choose to not bring what you are touching.
(Before someone brings up a ridiculous argument, no, the ground is not considered an object)
Yes, I am quite well aware of what permissive language means. I don't really need an English lesson. But I can tell you that reading too far into permissive language has caused numerous unintended rulings that the Paizo team has had to clean up. There is even a dev post somewhere that explains this. They have semi-recently been trying to clean up their specific wording because it has been that big of an issue.
Remember, the wording you are reading is from the CRB.
Again, this is not proof that your reading is wrong. It is only evidence that both readings are valid.
[Another thing, though, is that "you" includes your worn equipment. Which is why people you teleport with you come with their worn items. Manacles are worn.]
Pathfinder is a rules-intensive system. The spell itself tells you what you can do. What is unsaid cannot be done. It says "You can bring along objects as long as their weight does not exceed your maximum load." It PERMITS object transport, but does not require it. Further, the existence of Dimensional Shackles, a wondrous item that has Dimensional Anchor constantly trained on the bound implies that escape is ordinarily possible.According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit.
Though, read the target line...
"Target you and touched objects or other touched willing creatures"Targeting is through touch.
My whole point here is that it is no where as clear as what you were suggesting. It is arguable both ways with evidence of nearly equal strength. It really is a GM question.
But to your second point... not really, as Dimensional Shackles would prevent someone from escaping captivity through teleportation regardless of whether teleportation allows you to get out of manacles or not. There is no proof of intent in either direction here in regards to the point of contention.
Pathfinder is based on 3.5, etc., Etc. This is a trick casters have been using for DECADES. At no point has a dev ruled that it cannot be done. Even given Pathfinder's "conversational" rules text, for good or ill, "can" and "must" have been distinctly used as separate words with separate meanings. You can use the results of the reroll vs you must use the result of the reroll, etc. So, you "can" take objects with you, but it is not obligatory. Houserule as you will.
|
|
Pathfinder is based on 3.5, etc., Etc. This is a trick casters have been using for DECADES. At no point has a dev ruled that it cannot be done. Even given Pathfinder's "conversational" rules text, for good or ill, "can" and "must" have been distinctly used as separate words...Pathfinder is a rules-intensive system. The spell itself tells you what you can do. What is unsaid cannot be done. It says "You can bring along objects as long as their weight does not exceed your maximum load." It PERMITS object transport, but does not require it. Further, the existence of Dimensional Shackles, a wondrous item that has Dimensional Anchor constantly trained on the bound implies that escape is ordinarily possible.According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit.
Though, read the target line...
"Target you and touched objects or other touched willing creatures"Targeting is through touch.
My whole point here is that it is no where as clear as what you were suggesting. It is arguable both ways with evidence of nearly equal strength. It really is a GM question.
But to your second point... not really, as Dimensional Shackles would prevent someone from escaping captivity through teleportation regardless of whether teleportation allows you to get out of manacles or not. There is no proof of intent in either direction here in regards to the point of contention.
[sarcasm]Yup, totally a valid point there... every table for decades has ruled that way. In fact, everyone in the world agrees with you except some in this one specific thread. The opposite point being made is a brand new thing. Silly us.[/sarcasm]
According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit.How is "You can bring along objects as long as their weight doesn’t exceed your maximum load" not explicit?
"Can" is permissive, but not required. If you "can" do something, it is also an explicit statement that you are allowed to choose not to.
If I say you can teleport x lbs of objects and then tell you you teleport with whatever you are touching... what does that mean?
It means you are going to teleport with what you are touching... but teleportation will fail if you are touching more than x lbs of object. But that you can not choose to not bring what you are touching.
(Before someone brings up a ridiculous argument, no, the ground is not considered an object)Yes, I am quite well aware of what permissive language means. I don't really need an English lesson. But I can tell you that reading too far into permissive language has caused numerous unintended rulings that the Paizo team has had to clean up. There is even a dev post somewhere that explains this. They have semi-recently been trying to clean up their specific wording because it has been that big of an issue.
Remember, the wording you are reading is from the CRB.Again, this is not proof that your reading is wrong. It is only evidence that both readings are valid.
[Another thing, though, is that "you" includes your worn...
In regard to the first statement: There is still no obligation.
Here's a line pulled from the "target" section of the PRD: "Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself." In this case, the target line is telling you what you can target (touched creatures or objects), but the spell text ("... as defined by the spell itself") contains the language that allows for omission ("... can take objects..). The target line doesn't obfuscate the spell text, since the spell text trumps the target line by the rules of magic in the system.
...Pathfinder is based on 3.5, etc., Etc. This is a trick casters have been using for DECADES. At no point has a dev ruled that it cannot be done. Even given Pathfinder's "conversational" rules text, for good or ill, "can" and "must" have beenPathfinder is a rules-intensive system. The spell itself tells you what you can do. What is unsaid cannot be done. It says "You can bring along objects as long as their weight does not exceed your maximum load." It PERMITS object transport, but does not require it. Further, the existence of Dimensional Shackles, a wondrous item that has Dimensional Anchor constantly trained on the bound implies that escape is ordinarily possible.According to the text of the spell,you are under no obligation to take along anything when you teleport. Simply choose not to target the manacles (or your clothes, or that backpack full of lit fireworks, etc.) The spell is rather clear on this. You can take along objects or creature, given constraints. It does not say "you must." The intent is also clear, given text already presented by other posters: teleportation is designed to get you out of restraints. How do you bind a creature that CAN teleport? Dimensional Anchor.It actually is not that clear. It's certainly not explicit.
Though, read the target line...
"Target you and touched objects or other touched willing creatures"Targeting is through touch.
My whole point here is that it is no where as clear as what you were suggesting. It is arguable both ways with evidence of nearly equal strength. It really is a GM question.
But to your second point... not really, as Dimensional Shackles would prevent someone from escaping captivity through teleportation regardless of whether teleportation allows you to get out of manacles or not. There is no proof of intent in either direction here in regards to the point of contention.
You're becoming combative... And you still missed the point of "can" and "must" as defined by the system...
|
|
You're becoming combative... And you still missed the point of "can" and "must" as defined by the system...
You're the one trying to pressure me with a logical fallacy, but I"m the combative one. Yup. Totally works.
And, again, trying to show you that both views are valid. You have not shown explicit proof.
You're becoming combative... And you still missed the point of "can" and "must" as defined by the system...You're the one trying to pressure me with a logical fallacy, but I"m the combative one. Yup. Totally works.
And, again, trying to show you that both views are valid. You have not shown explicit proof.
Not saying you are in the "opposite camp" or what-have-you. What I am saying is that the ambiguity that you are trying to call out has existed for a while now and has been unaddressed. My argument is that it needs no addressing. It's already addressed "in-system." "Can" and "Must" are mechanical terms used in other areas of the system, and there's no reason to suggest that "can" works differently here than it does elsewhere.
So, I guess where we disagree is: you see ambiguity where I do not.EDIT: The point about manacles occupying a slot and being a part of "you" is something to be considered. Loose manacles are a for sure "hazy" situation, especially magical manacles that distinctly take up the "wrist" slot. However, manacles attached to walls begs another question: if the ground is not considered an "object," why is the wall or the ground of the fort considered an object for the purposes of Dimension Door (etc.)?