-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A 375
I think its best to think of the table as a series of limits to your movements when flying. You still use the normal rules (every other diagonal move costs 10 ft instead of 5 ft.) applied to a 3-d grid but you have limits.
For an average maneuverability character:
-You must move at least half your flight speed forward to remain airborne.
-You can turn 45 degrees every time you move 5 ft. forward.
-You can use 5 ft. of movement to turn in place 45 degrees.
-You can turn no more than 90 degrees in place.
-You can climb no more than half you move speed in a move action.
-You can descend at twice you speed.
-You must move at least 5fts forward before switching between up and down movement.
-Finally the tricky one witch requires trig to set a limit. Just going to use a picture
Edit: 3-d movement can really bog down play. House rules are probably the way to go.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q378- Considering the wording of the last sentence of the Enlarge Spell metamagic feat, what effects does it supply (if any) to a "Weapon Emulation" spell (Flame Dagger, Moon Blade, Thunderlance, and the like), considering that the weapon spell has a range defined by distance?
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A 378
It does nothing to such spells since it explicitly doesn't increase the ranges of such spells and increasing ranges is the only effect it has.
Q 379
Are unarmed strikes considered natural weapons?
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A379- No. Table 7-5 on page 116 of the Players Handbook lists it as a Simple weapon. As such, they accrue iterative attacks which Natural Weapons do not.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q380
If a creature with Vow of Poverty forcibly had an instantly acting item put on them (like a Rogue slipping a Ring of Freedom of Movement on their finger), would they lose the benefits of their Vow, even if they immediately removed it and did not benefit from its use?
What if a Cursed Item was placed on them under similar circumstances, so they couldn't remove the item?
Similarly, could a wearer of a Cursed Item that they didn't want but couldn't remove take Vow of Poverty?
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Garret Dorigan
A379- No. Table 7-5 on page 116 of the Players Handbook lists it as a Simple weapon. As such, they accrue iterative attacks which Natural Weapons do not.
Contention:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic Weapon Spell Description
Magic weapon gives a weapon a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls. (An enhancement bonus does not stack with a masterwork weapon’s +1 bonus on attack rolls.)
You can’t cast this spell on a natural weapon, such as an unarmed strike (instead, see magic fang). A monk’s unarmed strike is considered a weapon, and thus it can be enhanced by this spell.
Several other PHB spells use this wording. Unarmed Strikes are Natural Weapons, but unlike other Natural Weapons they gain iterative attacks.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q 381
If someone uses a Balance check to avoid being tripped (CAdv p. 97), does he get the size modifier he would usually get?
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A 379 [correction] Yes.
Unarmed strikes are natural weapons, which have the unique property of allowing iterative attacks as manufactured weapons do. (Being on the Weapons table just stipulates that it's a weapon, not that it's a manufactured weapon.) Some more extensive quotes from the rules to reinforce Urpriest's point:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Align Weapon
You can’t cast this spell on a natural weapon, such as an unarmed strike.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic Weapon
You can’t cast this spell on a natural weapon, such as an unarmed strike (instead, see magic fang).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic Fang
Magic fang gives one natural weapon of the subject a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls. The spell can affect a slam attack, fist, bite, or other natural weapon. (The spell does not change an unarmed strike’s damage from nonlethal damage to lethal damage.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon Magic, page 101
A fanged ring grants its wearer the Improved Unarmed Strike feat and the Improved Natural Attack (unarmed strike) feat.
Improved Natural Attack requires a natural weapon, and the Fanged Ring works with unarmed strike as that natural weapon for the granted feat.
The Monk class allows their unarmed strike to also be treated as a manufactured weapon. However, I think it's pretty obvious that an unarmed strike isn't the product of a blacksmith, but rather a natural weapon.
A 380
The Vow of Poverty rules are simple and unyielding.
Quote:
You may not, however, “borrow” a cloak of resistance or any other magic item from a companion for even a single round
If the character can dispossess themselves of the magic item forced upon them before a single round has expired then they will not break their vow. Wearing any magic item, cursed or not, for a full round will break the vow.
A 381 Yes.
The Balance check to resist being tripped replaces the usual Dexterity or Strength check. An ability check is always just 1d20 + the appropriate ability modifier, so the size modifier specified in the trip rules is not part of the ability check which you're replacing. Instead, the size modifier is added separately.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q 382
Are there any Full BAB classes/PrCs that (can) gain "Dodge" as a bonus feat at 1st level besides Fighter? Or alternatively a class/with ACF that gains bonus feats as a Fighter starting as 1st level?
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q383
Are there any books with Torture rules for 3.5?
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A 383: Sort of.
Book of Vile Darkness has such rules but is un-updated 3.0.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q 384
If I'm hiding behind an unaware enemy, and I UMD a buffing wand (Like True Strike or Wraithstrike), does the enemy become unequivocally aware of me at that point? What about a Casting Glove? Wand Chamber?
Edit: Had one more question.
Q 385
What's the equation to find out the price of a continuous use magic spell on a weapon/armor? (I remember duration of a spell had something to do with it...)
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Corinath
Q 384
If I'm hiding behind an unaware enemy, and I UMD a buffing wand (Like True Strike or Wraithstrike), does the enemy become unequivocally aware of me at that point? What about a Casting Glove? Wand Chamber?
A 384
No. No verbal component and thus silent, just waive. That is, unless you cast air horn or something xD
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q 386 If you apply a template to a human, do you still get your bonus feat?
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Razanir
Q 386 If you apply a template to a human, do you still get your bonus feat?
A 386 Yes, unless the template explicitly removes racial features. This also applies to a Dwarf's Stonecunning, a Halfing's Small size, etc.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A 385
According to the SRD, (Spell level)*(Caster level)*2000. If the duration of the spell is measured in rounds, multiply the cost by 4. If the duration is 1 minute/level, multiply it by 2. If the duration is 10 minutes/level, multiply it by 1.5. If it has a duration of 24 hours or greater, divide the cost in half.
A 386
Yes. Templates modify the traits of the base creature, so unless it specifically takes the bonus feat away, you still get it.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A379 Contention/Correction/Clarification-
Ask your DM.
If an Unarmed Strike is a Natural Weapon (upper case, defined game term) with the special rule of it gains Iterative Attacks like any other Simple weapon, any Full-Attack Action made by any character could be followed by an Unarmed Strike at their full BAB -5 to be used as a Secondary Natural Weapon.
This interpretation gives leeway toward abuse.
The interpretation that it is a Simple weapon, treated as a natural weapon (lower case, referential to concept) for magical effects and enhancements, does not muddy the waters of the system as it stands. While not in a game book, Skip Williams, co-designer of D&D 3.0 wrote an article on the Wizard's website doling out info on the mechanics of Unarmed Strikes. In part one, he defines an Unarmed Strike as such:
Quote:
Unarmed Attack/Unarmed Strike: These two terms are used interchangeably to describe an attack with an appendage that is not a natural weapon, such as a human's fist. An unarmed attack usually deals nonlethal damage and provokes an attack of opportunity from the creature being attacked.
In part two of this article, he supports the second interpretation with the following:
Quote:
Before we move on, it's worth pointing out that a character making an unarmed attack, even with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, does not have natural weapons. Nor is a natural weapon a substitute for the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.
As we saw in Part One, unarmed strikes allow iterative attacks and natural weapons do not.
A feat that requires natural weaponry as a prerequisite, such as Multiattack, doesn't work with unarmed strikes. Likewise, having a natural weapon is not a substitute for the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. For example, you don't meet the Improved Unarmed Strike prerequisite for the Deflect Arrows feat if you just have a natural weapon.
There is material to support both sides of the argument though, so as such define the rules of Unarmed Strike as it pertains to the game that you are in with your DM.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Re: A 379 Contention/Correction/Clarification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Garret Dorigan
If an Unarmed Strike is a Natural Weapon (upper case, defined game term) with the special rule of it gains Iterative Attacks like any other Simple weapon, any Full-Attack Action made by any character could be followed by an Unarmed Strike at their full BAB -5 to be used as a Secondary Natural Weapon.
I'm afraid you've mis-characterized "the special rule". What it actually does is categorize this particular natural strike to take it out of the realm of secondary natural attacks:
Quote:
An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.
The rules for light weapons specify the iterative attacks used for manufactured weapons in melee combat. As unarmed strikes are always considered light weapons, that removes the secondary natural attack possibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garret Dorigan
Skip Williams, co-designer of D&D 3.0 wrote an article on the Wizard's website doling out info on the mechanics of Unarmed Strikes.
An appeal to authority doesn't help here, where RAW forms the entire basis of all answers. I'll just note that the "Rules of the Game" articles include Skip's house rules as well as actual D&D game rules, without clearly distinguishing the two categories. Consequently, those online articles don't constitute a RAW source (even if they're sometimes helpful).
A 382 No.
A 384 [correction] Maybe.
In D&D there is no "hiding behind" someone, because the game has no "facing". That is, all creatures are assumed to be checking in all directions around them in every 6 second round. If you're hiding from another creature you've somehow satisfied all the requirements to be allowed to make a Hide check:
- line of sight (so there can be an opposed Spot check)
- cover/concealment
- enemy not observing you
However, that lasts only until they Spot you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spot
Action: Varies. Every time you have a chance to spot something in a reactive manner you can make a Spot check without using an action. Trying to spot something you failed to see previously is a move action.
If you've already hidden, the amount of effort required to Spot you next time might vary, requiring a move action. When this happens is dependent on how your DM interprets "something" (highlighted above). It could be any of these:
- the same creature
- the same creature in the same place
- the same creature in the same place doing (or not doing) the same thing
If the DM uses the last interpretation of "something" then the enemy will automatically get a reactive (no action) Spot check to see you waving your wand about in plain sight. Because using the Use Magic Device skill is not one of the listed actions that permits you to piggyback a new Hide check (such actions as moving, attacking, running, or charging), you can't try to stay hidden while doing so. Instead, there's an easy Spot check to see you there in plain sight. If you're Large size the DC is 0, as specified on this table. The DM will adjust the DC for your size and the particular circumstances, but it's still going to be an easy check to succeed at — if the enemy gets to make the check at all, that is.
If the DM uses a more Hide-friendly interpretation of "something", then your enemy will need to use a move action Spot recheck to look for whatever they might have previously failed to notice. That's a possibility for some enemies who are specifically looking for trouble; for instance, a guard standing on watch has nothing better to do than make one move action Spot and one move action Listen recheck every single round. Or, they might have the Quick Reconnoiter feat (Complete Adventurer) and get one of each of those as a free action every round.
Finally, even though you're hidden, you can still be heard. Listen has similar rules regarding trying to hear something the creature failed to notice previously, opposed by your Move Silently check.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A 384: Contention/Clarification
Using a wand is not silent so an enemy can use a listen check to try and hear you activate a wand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SRD
Spell Trigger
Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it’s even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Anyone with a spell on his or her spell list knows how to use a spell trigger item that stores that spell. (This is the case even for a character who can’t actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin.) The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SRD
Wands...
...Activation
Wands use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast, however, has a longer casting time than 1 standard action, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand.) To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the general direction of the target or area. A wand may be used while grappling or while swallowed whole.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q387
Does the Quintessence material which results from use of the Quintessence power have a magical aura by RAW?
Q388
Does material created with Major Creation or Wall of Stone?
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A 387
No
A 388
wall of stone-no
major creation-yes
Both the quintessence power and wall of stone spell are instantaneous so they are mundane materials without a psionic/magic aura.
Major creation has a duration based on the material and the material itself is part of the ongoing spell so it has a magical aura.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Both the quintessence power and wall of stone spell are instantaneous so they are mundane materials without a psionic/magic aura.
Not doubting you but is there any chance I could get a citation of where this is rules-wise? Again, no doubt, just eager to learn. :smallsmile:
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q 389: If a deity picks the Automatic Metamagic (Fortify) as a Salient Divine Ability, does that mean that the deity can increase its caster level as much as it wants?
Let me explain: If you have the Fortify Spell feat, you can increase the level of the slot you use for the spell, and for every spell level of increase, the Caster Level has a +2 increase.
But the Automatic Metamagic (Fortify) allows the deity to add the Fortify Metamagic to a spell without increasing its level, so, can a deity prepare a "Fortify x200" spell, and cast it with +400 Caster Level?.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Originally Posted by
unseenmage
Not doubting you but is there any chance I could get a citation of where this is rules-wise? Again, no doubt, just eager to learn. :smallsmile:
Here you go: Instantaneous spells:
Quote:
Instantaneous
The spell energy comes and goes the instant the spell is cast, though the consequences might be long-lasting.
And powers:
Quote:
Instantaneous
The psionic energy comes and goes the instant the power is manifested, though the consequences might be long-lasting.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
A 389
Yes, that appears to work. But it seems that you are misreading Fortify Spell- it does not increase Caster Level in general. It only increases your check to beat Spell Resistance; a deity with Automatic (Fortify Spell) could beat any finite Spell Resistance, but would not gain extra range, area, damage, or any other caster-level dependent benefits.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Originally Posted by
tyckspoon
A 389
Yes, that appears to work. But it seems that you are misreading Fortify Spell- it does not increase Caster Level in general. It only increases your check to beat Spell Resistance; a deity with Automatic (Fortify Spell) could beat any finite Spell Resistance, but would not gain extra range, area, damage, or any other caster-level dependent benefits.
Yes, I know that, but it's still overpowered. It makes the Spell Resistance of other deities useless:
"Oh, you have Divine Spell Resistance, that adds +20 to your Spell Resistance, raising it to...50, is it? Cute...MILLIONFOLD FORTIFIED IMPLOSION!!!"
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by unseenmage View Post
Not doubting you but is there any chance I could get a citation of where this is rules-wise? Again, no doubt, just eager to learn.
Here you go: Instantaneous spells:
Quote:
Instantaneous
The spell energy comes and goes the instant the spell is cast, though the consequences might be long-lasting.
And powers:
Quote:
Instantaneous
The psionic energy comes and goes the instant the power is manifested, though the consequences might be long-lasting.
Thanks but I'm not seeing where this details the why of those effects not having an aura though. Unless I'm missing it.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Originally Posted by
unseenmage
Thanks but I'm not seeing where this details the why of those effects not having an aura though. Unless I'm missing it.
An object created by Wall of Stone is not an effect: it's a stone wall. Stone walls do not have auras. Only if it were an effect of an ongoing spell could it have an aura.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Quote:
Originally Posted by
unseenmage
Thanks but I'm not seeing where this details the why of those effects not having an aura though. Unless I'm missing it.
To phrase it another way they aren't part of a spell (they may have been created by one but they aren't part of one) and it isn't stated that they have a magic aura anywhere so they don't have a magic aura.
-
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXIII
Q 390
Does the effect from Entangling Exhalation (target becomes entangled) also have the target make a DC 20 check to break free for half movement like the spell, Entangle?
Furthermore, does Entangling Exhalation allow a reflex save?