|
5 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
|
Spellcaster Defensive casts spell.
Hostile has a readied action to attack when Spell cast.
Combat Casting
Benefit: You get a +4 bonus on concentration checks made to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability when casting on the defensive or while grappled.
The Readied action does damage while he's casting defensively.
So does he get the +4 bonus to his Concentration check for both the check for Defensive Casting and the check for taking damage while casting?
I think yes because he's defensively casting when he takes the damage and the feat says you get the bonus for any Concentration checks made while defensively casting.
Not "you get +4 to the concentration check for defensive casting".
What do people think?
Thanks
Combat casting does not apply. The concentration check for damage is not one of the applicable checks.
Agreed. It does not factor in.
Why not?
It is a Concentration Check to cast a spell while Defensive Casting.
Therefore by the RAW it is an applicable check.
If it isn't explain why.
Because it's not a defensive casting check.
It's a taken damage check.
That's why.
Since the wording is what it is. . . . Yeah, looks like you would get the +4.
with the wording it say when you cast on the defensive not when casting defensively, so for me it seem yes you would have the +4 when taking damage since you were on the defensive
Define casting on the defensive.
The only game definition is casting defensively.
Are we defining casting defensively as different from casting on the defensive?
No. We're focusing on the word 'when'.
Assuming 'casting on the defensive' is the same as 'casting defensively' we get:
"You get a +4 bonus on concentration checks made to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability when casting defensively"
If it was a +4 bonus on concentration checks to cast defensively, it wouldn't apply. But a +4 bonus on concentration checks when casting defensively seems like it would apply; you were casting defensively at the time when you were hit.
Cavall wrote: Define casting on the defensive.
The only game definition is casting defensively.
Are we defining casting defensively as different from casting on the defensive?
when you are fighting defensively are you on the defensive or no? i would say yes so if you cast a quicken spell after you have done a attack when fighting defensively you are casting on the defensive, so if you trigger a ready action and you are hit when you are casting while fighting defensively, you are then casting on the defensive and combat casting can apply, yes casting defensively and casting on the defensive are similar but they are still different
John Murdock wrote: Cavall wrote: Define casting on the defensive.
The only game definition is casting defensively.
Are we defining casting defensively as different from casting on the defensive?
when you are fighting defensively are you on the defensive or no? i would say yes so if you cast a quicken spell after you have done a attack when fighting defensively you are casting on the defensive, so if you trigger a ready action and you are hit when you are casting while fighting defensively, you are then casting on the defensive and combat casting can apply, yes casting defensively and casting on the defensive are similar but they are still different If I can parse out what you are trying to say, there is absolutely no way that the "Fighting Defensively" attack option lets you benefit from Combat Casting. Casting Defensively is a specific check. Combat Casting applies to only this check and the specific check to cast while grappled. There is no "casting defensively condition". Its a specific defined game term, i.e. the only time you are casting defensively is when you make the casting defensively check.
If you have a bonus to acrobatics checks to avoid provoking from movement, that bonus wouldn't apply if you had to make an acrobatics check to avoid slipping during the same movement. Its the same thing.
Calth wrote: John Murdock wrote: Cavall wrote: Define casting on the defensive.
The only game definition is casting defensively.
Are we defining casting defensively as different from casting on the defensive?
when you are fighting defensively are you on the defensive or no? i would say yes so if you cast a quicken spell after you have done a attack when fighting defensively you are casting on the defensive, so if you trigger a ready action and you are hit when you are casting while fighting defensively, you are then casting on the defensive and combat casting can apply, yes casting defensively and casting on the defensive are similar but they are still different If I can parse out what you are trying to say, there is absolutely no way that the "Fighting Defensively" attack option lets you benefit from Combat Casting. Casting Defensively is a specific check. Combat Casting applies to only this check and the specific check to cast while grappled. There is no "casting defensively condition". Its a specific defined game term, i.e. the only time you are casting defensively is when you make the casting defensively check.
If you have a bonus to acrobatics checks to avoid provoking from movement, that bonus wouldn't apply if you had to make an acrobatics check to avoid slipping during the same movement. Its the same thing. never in combat casting its saying you get a +4 bonus to casting defensively, and you didn't answer my question. when fighting defensively are you on the defensive yes or no? if yes, then combat casting apply because you cast on the defensive and the feat say when casting on the defensive. if no, then explain to me why you are not on the defensive when fighting defensively
John Murdock wrote: Calth wrote: John Murdock wrote: Cavall wrote: Define casting on the defensive.
The only game definition is casting defensively.
Are we defining casting defensively as different from casting on the defensive?
when you are fighting defensively are you on the defensive or no? i would say yes so if you cast a quicken spell after you have done a attack when fighting defensively you are casting on the defensive, so if you trigger a ready action and you are hit when you are casting while fighting defensively, you are then casting on the defensive and combat casting can apply, yes casting defensively and casting on the defensive are similar but they are still different If I can parse out what you are trying to say, there is absolutely no way that the "Fighting Defensively" attack option lets you benefit from Combat Casting. Casting Defensively is a specific check. Combat Casting applies to only this check and the specific check to cast while grappled. There is no "casting defensively condition". Its a specific defined game term, i.e. the only time you are casting defensively is when you make the casting defensively check.
If you have a bonus to acrobatics checks to avoid provoking from movement, that bonus wouldn't apply if you had to make an acrobatics check to avoid slipping during the same movement. Its the same thing. never in combat casting its saying you get a +4 bonus to casting defensively, and you didn't answer my question. when fighting defensively are you on the defensive yes or no? if yes, then combat casting apply because you cast on the defensive and the feat say when casting on the defensive. if no, then explain to me why you are not on the defensive when fighting defensively No, you are not on the defensive. There is no such thing as on the defensive.
Calth wrote: John Murdock wrote: Calth wrote: John Murdock wrote: Cavall wrote: Define casting on the defensive.
The only game definition is casting defensively.
Are we defining casting defensively as different from casting on the defensive?
when you are fighting defensively are you on the defensive or no? i would say yes so if you cast a quicken spell after you have done a attack when fighting defensively you are casting on the defensive, so if you trigger a ready action and you are hit when you are casting while fighting defensively, you are then casting on the defensive and combat casting can apply, yes casting defensively and casting on the defensive are similar but they are still different If I can parse out what you are trying to say, there is absolutely no way that the "Fighting Defensively" attack option lets you benefit from Combat Casting. Casting Defensively is a specific check. Combat Casting applies to only this check and the specific check to cast while grappled. There is no "casting defensively condition". Its a specific defined game term, i.e. the only time you are casting defensively is when you make the casting defensively check.
If you have a bonus to acrobatics checks to avoid provoking from movement, that bonus wouldn't apply if you had to make an acrobatics check to avoid slipping during the same movement. Its the same thing. never in combat casting its saying you get a +4 bonus to casting defensively, and you didn't answer my question. when fighting defensively are you on the defensive yes or no? if yes, then combat casting apply because you cast on the defensive and the feat say when casting on the defensive. if no, then explain to me why you are not on the defensive when fighting defensively No, you are not on the defensive. There is no such thing as on the defensive.
explain why there is no such thing as on the defensive, just saying that is not an argument nor an explanation
Actually, maybe this feat wouldn't apply. It only says it applies to 'casting spells'.
With casting defensively:
Quote: If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you’re casting) to succeed. That's a concentration check to cast a spell.
When getting injured while casting:
Quote: If you take damage while trying to cast a spell, you must make a concentration check with a DC equal to 10 + the damage taken + the level of the spell you’re casting. If you fail the check, you lose the spell without effect. That's not a concentration check to cast a spell, it's a concentration check to keep a spell you're already casting.
But there are a lot of ambiguous words here, so I don't think it's conclusive.
John Murdock wrote: Calth wrote: John Murdock wrote: Calth wrote: John Murdock wrote: Cavall wrote: Define casting on the defensive.
The only game definition is casting defensively.
Are we defining casting defensively as different from casting on the defensive?
when you are fighting defensively are you on the defensive or no? i would say yes so if you cast a quicken spell after you have done a attack when fighting defensively you are casting on the defensive, so if you trigger a ready action and you are hit when you are casting while fighting defensively, you are then casting on the defensive and combat casting can apply, yes casting defensively and casting on the defensive are similar but they are still different If I can parse out what you are trying to say, there is absolutely no way that the "Fighting Defensively" attack option lets you benefit from Combat Casting. Casting Defensively is a specific check. Combat Casting applies to only this check and the specific check to cast while grappled. There is no "casting defensively condition". Its a specific defined game term, i.e. the only time you are casting defensively is when you make the casting defensively check.
If you have a bonus to acrobatics checks to avoid provoking from movement, that bonus wouldn't apply if you had to make an acrobatics check to avoid slipping during the same movement. Its the same thing. never in combat casting its saying you get a +4 bonus to casting defensively, and you didn't answer my question. when fighting defensively are you on the defensive yes or no? if yes, then combat casting apply because you cast on the defensive and the feat say when casting on the defensive. if no, then explain to me why you are not on the defensive when fighting defensively No, you are not on the defensive. There is no such thing as on the defensive.
explain why there is no such thing as on the defensive, just saying that is not an argument nor an explanation Its not a game term. A character can't be "on the defensive." That's an undefined condition that doesn't exist. There is the poorly worded "casting on the defensive" in the mini concentration check section in the combat rules, which is explained more fully in the magic rules under "casting defensively." But there is no such thing in Pathfinder as being "on the defensive".
Calth wrote: Its not a game term. A character can't be "on the defensive." That's an undefined condition that doesn't exist. There is the poorly worded "casting on the defensive" in the mini concentration check section in the combat rules, which is explained more fully in the magic rules under "casting defensively." But there is no such thing in Pathfinder as being "on the defensive". since the words on the defensive is in a feat and even a poorly worded words in a rule section then its a still a game term, the words on the defensive is there as a game term
John Murdock wrote: Calth wrote: Its not a game term. A character can't be "on the defensive." That's an undefined condition that doesn't exist. There is the poorly worded "casting on the defensive" in the mini concentration check section in the combat rules, which is explained more fully in the magic rules under "casting defensively." But there is no such thing in Pathfinder as being "on the defensive". since the words on the defensive is in a feat and even a poorly worded words in a rule section then its a still a game term, the words on the defensive is there as a game term No, "on the defensive" is not a game term. "Casting on the defensive" is kind of a term, but it literally appears in only two places, the feat and a sentence in the combat rules. Everywhere else it is referred to as "casting defensively." (Of which there are many uses) So "casting on the defensive" is either its own unique thing separate from "casting defensively" that only benefits from Combat Casting and has no other bonuses and Combat Casting doesn't apply to "casting defensively", or its a relic from the 3.5 transition that got left behind and isn't the common phrasing. I sure know which of the two I think is the right answer.
Guys the two of you are bad at arguing you are going back and forwards about things that are not relevant...
"Casting on the defensive" is not a game term that is defined anywhere. The most likely thing is that it is intended to mean "casting defensively" but we cannot prove that.
I guess if a Magus wanted to use fighting defensively while casting a spell with spell combat within reach of an enemy and he didn't care about provoking attacks of opportunity so didn't cast defensively and then he took damage, the GM would have to decide then whether the feat Combat Casting applied. But mostly people do not fight defensively while casting spells, so it's kind of an edge case.
i will stop this argument since i know it will lead nowhere better stop now than having a perpetual argument on a very unclear term
Matthew Downie wrote: Guys the two of you are bad at arguing you are going back and forwards about things that are not relevant...
"Casting on the defensive" is not a game term that is defined anywhere. The most likely thing is that it is intended to mean "casting defensively" but we cannot prove that.
I guess if a Magus wanted to use fighting defensively while casting a spell with spell combat within reach of an enemy and he didn't care about provoking attacks of opportunity so didn't cast defensively and then he took damage, the GM would have to decide then whether the feat Combat Casting applied. But mostly people do not fight defensively while casting spells, so it's kind of an edge case.
Except I would disagree with your comment here. Casting on the defensive is defined as using a concentration check to avoid an AoO on casting a spell in the combat rules. It does have a definition, its just that definition is reassigned to the term "casting defensively" in the magic section and generally referred to in all later sources as casting defensively. The simplest explanation is that the term "casting on the defensive" is a publication error and should be "casting defensively" both in the combat rules and the combat casting feat. Otherwise you have two game terms referring to the same rules element one which has 2 mentions and one has dozens.
Fighting defensively plays no part in the discussion.
I think the Fighting Defensively when casting a Spell (likely to only be seen in a Magus and a few other unusual builds) is a valid point to go "hey".
But it's also at the point the rules are so vague you don't even have enough to make an educated guess at how it should be handled.
Cavall wrote: Because it's not a defensive casting check.
It's a taken damage check.
That's why.
It is a concentration check made while the mage is casting defensively.
Volkard Abendroth wrote: Cavall wrote: Because it's not a defensive casting check.
It's a taken damage check.
That's why.
It is a concentration check made while the mage is casting defensively. And what is that check for? To not provoke. Readied actions aren't provoked they are triggered.
It gives you a bonus to exactly 2 things. The check to not provoke and the check to cast on a grapple.
There is no such game term in all the books as on the defensive for casting. Not in any way defined. It's clear it's defensive casting check, or otherwise the feat does nothing because it gives a bonus to something that doesn't exist. And it doesnt exist because if people want to pretend it's not casting defensively then it has zero game definition.
This is wilful ignorance in order to claim a bonus that isn't there, because there is no such defined bonus otherwise.
Why even have the part about grappling there? Surely you'd be casting "on the defensive" while grappled anyways? Why mention it? The answer is clear, because grappled (like defensive casting) IS clearly defined. As 2 of the many ways to make a concentration check.
There's a chart. It contains defensive casting and grappled. There's no mention otherwise of this maneuver casting on the defensive, no defined modifiers. It doesn't exist other than defensive casting checks.
FAQ'd. This is a very common situation, so it'd be good to get it sorted out when Paizo has a free moment.
Cavall wrote: Volkard Abendroth wrote: Cavall wrote: Because it's not a defensive casting check.
It's a taken damage check.
That's why.
It is a concentration check made while the mage is casting defensively. And what is that check for? To not provoke. Readied actions aren't provoked they are triggered.
It gives you a bonus to exactly 2 things. The check to not provoke and the check to cast on a grapple.
There is no such game term in all the books as on the defensive for casting. Not in any way defined. It's clear it's defensive casting check, or otherwise the feat does nothing because it gives a bonus to something that doesn't exist. And it doesnt exist because if people want to pretend it's not casting defensively then it has zero game definition.
This is wilful ignorance in order to claim a bonus that isn't there, because there is no such defined bonus otherwise.
Why even have the part about grappling there? Surely you'd be casting "on the defensive" while grappled anyways? Why mention it? The answer is clear, because grappled (like defensive casting) IS clearly defined. As 2 of the many ways to make a concentration check.
There's a chart. It contains defensive casting and grappled. There's no mention otherwise of this maneuver casting on the defensive, no defined modifiers. It doesn't exist other than defensive casting checks. The check is a concentration check to cast a spell.
You seem to be simultaneously accusing others of making up terms that don't exist and then make up terms yourself to support your argument.
You defensively cast to avoid losing a spell due to taking damage while casting. The specific mechanism is that when doing so you don't attract AOO's as a general rule when defensively casting.
The Combat Casting feat clearly states that you get a +4 to concentration checks to successfully cast a spell made while you are defensively casting.
Defensively casting is from starting to cast the spell until the spell is completed or fails.
If you take damage while defensively casting you have to make a concentration check based on the damage to complete the spell.
This check is made while defensively casting.
The feat does not say it only applies to the defensive casting check. You keep saying it does but it doesn't.
So what you're saying is that casting on the defensive uses the rules for defensive casting and a bunch of extra stuff that lasts the while round because you think it does?
Citation needed. Show me where it says that. Show me where it says "+4 To all rolls to concentrate until the spell is done".
Because you keep saying it does and have no evidence.
The idea that you can say it's not casting defensively but uses the rules of casting defensively plus more is really what brings the case down.
Quote:
Casting Defensively
If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make aconcentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you’re casting) to succeed. You lose the spell if you fail.
That's all it does.
Quote:
Injury
If you take damage while trying to cast a spell, you must make aconcentration check with a DC equal to 10 + the damage taken + the level of the spell you’re casting. If you fail the check, you lose the spell without effect. The interrupting event strikes during spellcasting if it comes between the time you started and the time you complete a spell (for a spell with a casting time of 1 full round or more) or if it comes in response to your casting the spell (such as anattack of opportunity provoked by the spell or a contingent attack, such as a readied action).
If you are taking continuous damage, such as from an acid arrow or by standing in a lake of lava, half the damage is considered to take place while you are casting a spell. You must make aconcentration check with a DC equal to 10 + 1/2 the damage that the continuous source last dealt + the level of the spell you’re casting. If the last damage dealt was the last damage that the effect could deal, then the damage is over and does not distract you.
Completely separate part.
So I ask again to show me in clearly defined game terms where it gives you that +4 bonus to all rolls. Where does it say it?
I'm not making up anything. I'm quoting the core rules, the feat and the fact you yourself seem to think there's a difference between defensive casting and casting while defensive.
I'm asking you to show me where and what casting on the defensive means as defined by the rules. The best you've given is to quote casting defensively and say "plus more until the spell is done".
Where? The feat doesn't give any sort of indication it does what you say. It shows 2 instances. Neither one of which says "for every concentration check until the spell is finished".
Also show me where I've made things up. If you're going to accuse me of like to see where. Because I'm just cut and pasting core rules. Which are fantastically clear.
I quoted the section at the start.
Combat Casting Feat
Quote: You are adept at spellcasting when threatened or distracted.
Benefit: You get a +4 bonus on concentration checks made to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability when casting on the defensive or while grappled.
A readied Action interrupts the action that triggers it - Do I need to quote that rule as well?
Casting Defensively by the general rules of English would cover the the period of the actual casting. Now Pathfinder rules don't always use general rules of English but unless they specifically say so those are the rules you have to go by, or we have no framework to communicate with.
I did not say that Casting Defensively and Fighting Defensively aren't the same thing. I said the rules don't give sufficient detail to be able to make a definitive statement on it. I do think it's a reasonable possibility.
I'm curious. Do you think if I was been Grappled and cast a spell and got damaged by a Readied action that I would get the +4 bonus from Combat Casting for the Concentration Check to complete the spell due to damage taken?
No. Because readied action is injury. Concentration checks due to injury are not grapple concentration checks or checks to avoid provoking attacks of opportunity. The only 2 of multiple instances that the feat affects.
I also don't think standing on a ships deck during a storm and having combat casting helps either. Because that is yet another kind of concentration check that is neither injury or trying to avoid provoking.
Fighting defensively gives a penalty to hit and a boost to a.c. I don't think it's a reasonable possibility that happens during a defensive concentration check. It's not even close to whats listed in the feat. The reason there's not sufficient detail is because they arent related in the slightest
I think you have confirmation bias because you want this to be true, but it just isn't.
Not do I think saying "is reasonable" or "A possibility" or "under general rules of english" define what is RAW.
RAW there are only a handful of concentration checks to make.
RAW the core lists them.
RAW what you are suggesting is outside that core defined list.
RAW doesn't allow for that, nor ill defined possibilities that are not rules based.
Therefore RAW you are incorrect in the reading.
The entirety of your argument is that it is a check to cast a spell defensively. But this isn't that check. It's an entirely different check that doesn't care if you're being defensive or not.
Ok look let's put it another way. You're fighting defensively. Your a.c. goes up. You get hit. Did your damage taken go down because you were being defensive? No. Because one had nothing to do with the other.
Just like these two checks. The readied action doesn't care if you're trying to avoid provoking. It's a triggered action. So when you get hit you make a check, and that goes under injury NOT casting defensively.
They are just two separate fictions of the same check. And only some of those functions gain the bonus. The feat would say "to all caster checks while casting" if it meant all concentration checks.
It doesn't. It lists 2 very specific types under the list and leaves the rest out. And no matter how much rules of English you want to add in, it doesn't say "to all checks while casting". If it did you'd be right.
He didn't say "all checks while casting", rules are not "fantastically" clear (entire reason for question), you demonstrate all the poor argument tactics that you accuse him of, find an undeniable rules statement to support you're argument.
I'd agree the the wording is unclear.
I suspect the general initial intention was that the feat was just to help with avoiding the AOO from casting to begin with. Of course generally if you make that check you won't take damage while doing the casting as you didn't attract the AOO. The difficulty here is that you then get damaged anyway from a readied action.
The way it is written is that if you are using the defensive casting "when casting on the defensive " then you get the +4 to your concentration checks. Given that the feat also gives it's bonus when you are having to make a check due to being grappled, it would appear the intent is wider than just avoiding the casting AOO.
So are you casting defensively? Yes, you are. Also note You had to make an additional concentration check to avoid losing the spell, so casting defensively was not a no-lose choice.
Are you making a concentration check? Yes, you are.
Were I the GM, I think I'd allow the feat to apply to the concentration check to keep casting when you have taken damage as it is a concentration check you have made while casting defensively.
As an aside, I would agree with the posters above that fighting defensively the feat would not count. But then again, if you are doing that, it is a standard action so you won't be casting a spell at the same time.
Based on the wording, I would give my players with this feat +4 to all concentration checks made when they were casting defensively, not just to concentration checks to cast defensively.
I think I would apply it as well. I believe that the readied action damage is a corner case and you can't put every possibility into a feat description. I think that if someone specifically was casting defensively that they should get the bonus from combat casting.
I'd say no, but since usually the damage results in a DC that is far higher than the concentration to avoid an AOO that I would just let them apply it if they made a big deal out of it. It's not going to make a big difference.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
