|
This appears to be a common cloth sack about 2 feet by 4 feet in size.
Magic items, unless otherwise noted, take damage as nonmagical items of the same sort. A damaged magic item continues to function, but if it is destroyed, all its magical power is lost. Magic items that take damage in excess of half their total hit points, but not more than their total hit points, gain the broken condition, and might not function properly (see the Appendix).
Cloth doesn't deal well with fire, and a Bag of Holding isn't especially resistant to it.
Bloodline Arcana: When casting any spell that deals fire damage, you can instead heal your targets. The spell deals no damage, and living creatures affected by the spell instead regain a number of hit points equal to half the fire damage the spell would normally deal.
Wall of Fire has no target. RAW, it doesn't benefit from the Phoenix bloodline.
RAI, I don't think that a WoF will heal people.The bloodline is from a splatbook, so, as often happens, this kind of interaction has never been considered by Paizo's people.
A permanent spell has the same problem, squared. No target.
|
Thanks for being quick.
Bloodline Arcana: When casting any spell that deals fire damage, you can instead heal your targets. The spell deals no damage, and living creatures affected by the spell instead regain a number of hit points equal to half the fire damage the spell would normally deal.
Semantics I can work with when they are unclear:
I carefully consider the willowisp on the left or on the right right as the target for my next glitterdust -- without line of sight to anything.
I was directly targeted by that cone of cold -- and my companions, but who cares about them!
But also rules are useful:
Creatures: A spell with this kind of area affects creatures directly (like a targeted spell), but it affects all creatures in an area of some kind rather than individual creatures you select. The area might be a spherical burst, a cone-shaped burst, or some other shape.
Hence the creatures of an area spell semantically qualify as targets, but its easy to argue semantics within rules to change the rules, so on the semantics of why things are written the way they are:
A spell that affects multiple creatures is more powerful than a spell that only affects one creature. Multiple-creature spells tend to either be area effects such as cones and spheres (like fireball), or allow the caster to select multiple targets as long as no two targets are more than a set distance apart (like slow). A burst effect like fireball can potentially affect many more enemies than a pick-your- targets spell like slow, but you never risk hitting your friends when you use slow. Select which type is most appropriate for the spell, but understand that selecting multiple targets is generally more powerful except at the lowest caster levels (where a low caster level means few targets compared to a burst which can affect many)
It would be a good conversation at a con why authors (even of lowly splatbooks) choose to say words like 'targets' and mean 'targets of only pick-your-targets spells' when they could more clearly and succinctly say 'multiple creature affecting spells' or 'creatures affected by pick-your-target spells' but not 'creatures effected only by selecting-multiple-targets spells and not all multiple-creature-affecting spells'. Potentially, that could be a lot of fun for both parties involved.
Less good convo would be choosing a counter example of a new spell combo for a game WHERE THE MOST COMMONLY KNOWN SPELLS are burning hands AND FIREBALL. That would together imply both that the author of the 'splatbook' doesn't know how the game works but also at the same time that the author intends the reader to understand their mistake and choose more obscure fire spells to reach their intended outcome correctly. That would sound like a normal Paizo rules discussion.
Bad convo, and I must strenuously stress the precariousness for participants involved, would be starting conversation with a stranger by saying that cloth doesn't deal well with hypothetically healing fire. That would only assume the readers both know and agree with your conclusion before they start reading and that they appreciate the particular way your arguments refuse to respond to even the premise of the original question.
Good fun for those who like to read trolling, bad news for those who like their PF1 community.
#gooddaysir #catchmeonabadday #sorryforshouting
|
I'm going to basically go the opposite way from Diego and say while I think this might be rules legal I would probably not allow it as a GM.
Yes, the arcana says "heal your targets" but it also says "when casting any spell that does fire damage." We won't get an official answer on this but the intention certainly seems to be that you could fireball an area to heal the creatures in the radius.
I don't see any reason you couldn't put the wall in the bag. The bloodline power makes it so the spell does no damage, so the bag wouldn't be harmed.
But... it's exploitable. Your siege idea, or a temple in a town, is an extremely powerful effect. A site that provides unlimited healing forever just by visiting is mythic-level magic. A portable version? Even better. Even heal mid-combat if you need to! It's just too good. Not to mention all the normal extradimensional space arguments about line of effect (can you be in the bag and shoot an arrow at someone outside it?), line of sense (if not, can you tell what's going on outside of the bag?), and metagaming (if neither, do you have to send the player out of the room?)
My guess is that the author of the bloodline just didn't think of permanency at all.
|
|
It would be a good conversation at a con why authors (even of lowly splatbooks) choose to say words like 'targets' and mean 'targets of only pick-your-targets spells'. . .
I've talked to many authors at cons (and even did a tiny bit of PF1 writing for Paizo myself) and the simplest explanation is almost always correct: they didn't think of it.
When you write something, you know how it works. If you use it in your home game and a player has a question, you clarify it and you're done. If you're submitting it to Paizo you try to come at it from different angles and "break" it to make sure it works. But sometimes you miss an angle. It's when thousands of players start fiddling with things and saying "how about this variation, or this combination?" that you realize that there is ambiguity.
It's not unique to "authors in lowly splatbooks." The PF1 Core Rulebook was the most picked-over, edited, closest designer intervention book in the entire line. And it had 6 printings, each with new errata.
For the Phoenix bloodline, the errata is actually very simple. Two variations, depending on how it is actually supposed to work.
When casting any spell that deals fire damage and targets one or more creatures, you can instead heal your targets. The spell deals no damage, and living creatures affected by the spell instead regain a number of hit points equal to half the fire damage the spell would normally deal.
When casting any spell that deals fire damage, you can instead healyour targetsthose affected. The spell deals no damage, and living creatures affected by the spell instead regain a number of hit points equal to half the fire damage the spell would normally deal.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1)
Note that bloodline or school effects can't be included when making magical items.
You can't make a wand of Orc bloodline Fireball, nor one of Evoker Fireball.
A permanent Wall of Fire is akin to a magical item.
It is RAI, not RAW, but I don't think you are intended to be able to make a bloodline effect on a spell into a permanent magical effect.
2)
Target is a game term when referring to spells.
The creator of the bloodline could have used it carelessly, but it has a game effect.
You must make choices about whom a spell is to affect or where an effect is to originate, depending on a spell’s type. The next entry in a spell description defines the spell’s target (or targets), its effect, or its area, as appropriate.Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
If the target of a spell is yourself (the Target line of the spell description includes “You”), you do not receive a saving throw, and spell resistance does not apply. The saving throw and spell resistance lines are omitted from such spells.
Some spells restrict you to willing targets only. Declaring yourself as a willing target is something that can be done at any time (even if you’re flat-footed or it isn’t your turn). Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious
but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling,
paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing.
Some spells allow you to redirect the effect to new targets or areas after you cast the spell. Redirecting a spell is a move action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Citing area effect spells, especially Glitterdust, whose function is to affect invisible creatures that you can target and saying that you target a creature by selecting where you place a spell, shows a lack of comprehension of how targeting works.
|
|
Does someone know if there is a Pathfinder Society ruling on the Phoenix bloodline?
A post makes me wonder if there is a ruling that the bloodline effect works only on instantaneous effects.
It would be logical, but there is no FAQ, as it was published in a softbound.
Yup, that was the PFS ruling. (Side note: there were a lot of clarifications for Heroes of Golarion.)
Page 24 — A phoenix sorcerer’s bloodline arcana only affects instantaneous spells whose spell level is 1 or higher.
Even without permanency (not allowed in PFS) any non-instantaneous spell could result in a ridiculous amount of healing. Spend 30' of movement walking back and forth through the healing wall of fire 6 times, then your standard to cast a spell...
|
|
AFAIK(Wall of Fire, permanent in a bag of holding) is a 'no' due to Line of Effect being cut at the bag's opening.
Ah, but what if you got in the bag first, then cast the spell, made it permanent, and got back out?
Beyond that, this is what I was referring to as "the normal extradimensional space arguments." These items are really intended for storage only and using them in clever ways requires a whole lot of GM adjudication. I don't know of anywhere it is stated that planar boundaries end line of effect, but it's totally reasonable. But the bag mouth is a portal into that extradimensional space so should a spell pass through the portal. . . ?
-Can you see through the planar barrier? Both ways?
-If the opening cuts line of effect, what happens when I reach into my bag of holding with the hand that is wearing my Ring of Protection? Do I lose my deflection bonus while I'm fishing around for an item?
-Ridiculous number of other ridiculous situations
|
|
I love it! Portable hole of holy healing fire it is!
On the note of the bag of holding tho, anyone ever consider filling them with air and turning them inside out? Rules clearly state that everything in there is instantly plopped out and physics + instant expansion = pneumatic rockets =-)
Edit: Avagadro (guy not number) totally fits the time period feeling of most DnD worlds and he calculated the mass of gasses. What is the STP of 300lbs of air inside different sized fuselages?
|
|
in PF1 a PC will need the Technologist feat to use skills in a "modern" technological way. I've posted as to where I think the technological divide is in the PF1 Game as it is presented using alchemy as the baseline. It is a game with a mixed modern-medieval fantasy setting so your GM and group would have to want to take their home game in that direction.
You have discussed that in the forums? I am interested in reading that discussion.
In my opinion, some of the more advanced areas of the world are at the level of the late 17th to early 18th centuries (grandfather clocks, movable type printing, widespread cartridges for firearms). As for our world, backward places are far behind if you aren't part of the elite.