Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XX

[hydraa]

A 144

By combining the Ronin class feature Banzai Charge, which lowers AC to increase damage, and the feat Shock Trooper, which does the same, is it possible to reach a negative AC value? If this were the case,or even if it reaches 0, would the character still be able to preform a full -subtraction power attack/Banzai charge? How does rolling-to hit work against a negative AC character?

I do not see any restriction against having a Negative AC

Negative AC could be acheived by Size {Colossal (-8)} 1 Dex (-5) Cursed armor (-2), Bracers of Defenselessness (-5)

The above should give -10 AC. Then there could be another -2 or -4 based on conditions [also being helpless or pinned is another way to get the -5 AC by having a effective 0 DEX]

As for hitting, It would allow some one that is non proficient or wielding a cursed sword at least a better chance of hitting (They could end up with a -4 on a to-hit attack roll and still hit the unfortunate creature above.

It appears to me that both could be used since they are different. One is based on using power attack and the class feature does not require a power attack. So it looks like you could take as a level 20 char a -40 to your armor class (-20 from each)

[powerdemon]

Q145

In the MIC the Eternal Wand(s) have Spellcraft DCs listed. What are the DCs for?

[Fellfire]

Q146

Am I calculating my BAB correctly for a 3.5 game?
Rogue 10 +7/+2
Fighter 2 +2
Jaunter 3 +2
Swash 3 +3

Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Two Weapon Fighting (light weapon off-hand)

+12/+2/+12/+9

or would it be?

+12/+0/+12/+9

[Thurbane]

A 146

Primary hand: +12/+7/+2
Off hand: +12/+9

I don't believe there is a set sequence in which you must attack with primary and secondary, and they can be interspersed (although with a given hand, you must attack from highest to lowest).

[Fellfire]

Q147

A 146

Primary hand: +12/+7/+2
Off hand: +12/+9

I don't believe there is a set sequence in which you must attack with primary and secondary, and they can be interspersed (although with a given hand, you must attack from highest to lowest).

If Sneak Attacking would the extra d6s be added to all 5 attacks?

[Thurbane]

A 147

If Sneak Attacking would the extra d6s be added to all 5 attacks?

If each attack meets the conditions of sneak attack (i.e. the opponent is flanked or denied his DEX bonus against all attacks), then yes.

[Fellfire]

Q148

So, a Rogue 6/Fighter8 (+6/+1) + (+8/+3) becomes +14/+9/+4?

[Thurbane]

A148

You only ever have one BAB, regardless of the number of classes you have. You simply add the BAB from all class levels together. In your example above, the character would have a BAB of +12 (Rogue 6 is +4, Fighter 8 is +8). Iterative attacks are then calculated from that BAB, if it is +6 or higher.

For BAB +12, the attack sequence is +12/+7/+2. Iteratives are always 5 less than BAB, as follows:

BAB +6: +6/+1
BAB +11: +11/+6+/1
BAB +16: +16/+11/+6+/1

Iteratives cap at three extra attacks, under normal circumstances.

[Fellfire]

Q149

A148

You only ever have one BAB, regardless of the number of classes you have. You simply add the BAB from all class levels together. In your example above, the character would have a BAB of +12 (Rogue 6 is +4, Fighter 8 is +8). Iterative attacks are then calculated from that BAB, if it is +6 or higher.

For BAB +12, the attack sequence is +12/+7/+2. Iteratives are always 5 less than BAB, as follows:

BAB +6: +6/+1
BAB +11: +11/+6+/1
BAB +16: +16/+11/+6+/1

Iteratives cap at three extra attacks, under normal circumstances.

Sorry, I think I read the table wrong. If the above example was instead Rogue8/Fighter 8 it would be +14/+9/+4, right? And if say you were Fighter 14/Rogue 8 it would become +20/+15/+10/+5?

[Douglas]

A 146

Primary hand: +12/+7/+2
Off hand: +12/+9

I don't believe there is a set sequence in which you must attack with primary and secondary, and they can be interspersed (although with a given hand, you must attack from highest to lowest).

The second off hand attack should be +7, not +9.

Q149Sorry, I think I read the table wrong. If the above example was instead Rogue8/Fighter 8 it would be +14/+9/+4, right? And if say you were Fighter 14/Rogue 8 it would become +20/+15/+10/+5?

Your Rogue 8/Fighter 8 example is correct. Your Fighter 14/Rogue 8 example is not, but only because it has a total level higher than 20 so the epic level rules come into play. If epic levels followed the same progression as pre-epic for BAB, both of your examples would be correct.

[Fellfire]

The second off hand attack should be +7, not +9.


Your Rogue 8/Fighter 8 example is correct. Your Fighter 14/Rogue 8 example is not, but only because it has a total level higher than 20 so the epic level rules come into play. If epic levels followed the same progression as pre-epic for BAB, both of your examples would be correct.

I think I got it. I'm working from a 3.0 PhB. According to my chart F14 is +14 and R8 is +6 = +20...

Now, w/ Improved TWF isn't the penalty -5 off of 14 BAB on the second off-hand att?

[Fellfire]

Q150

From the SRD..
xxx
Improved Two-Weapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisites

Dex 17, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit

In addition to the standard single extra attack you get with an off-hand weapon, you get a second attack with it, albeit at a -5 penalty. See the Two-Weapon Fighting special attack.
Normal

Without this feat, you can only get a single extra attack with an off-hand weapon.
Special

A fighter may select Improved Two-Weapon Fighting as one of his fighter bonus feats.

A 6th-level ranger who has chosen the two-weapon combat style is treated as having Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, even if he does not have the prerequisites for it, but only when he is wearing light or no armor.
xxx

Originally Posted by douglas View Post
The second off hand attack should be +7, not +9.

So, the iterative rule of always being 5 less is not true in this instance right? Because the first att w the light off-hand weapon is at -2???

[Curmudgeon]

Re: A 146

I don't believe there is a set sequence in which you must attack with primary and secondary, and they can be interspersed (although with a given hand, you must attack from highest to lowest).

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first.

You've got that a bit confused, I'm afraid; the rule about striking with either weapon first doesn't override the rule requiring that you make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. At every equal attack bonus you can choose either weapon first. Thus you could attack at BAB with main or off hand in either order, then at BAB-5 with main or off hand in either order, and so on if you have more attacks possible.

[Fellfire]

Re A146

So, you can alternate attacks with either hand as long as they go in descending order.

My only confusion lies in the -2 penalty for attacking with an off-hand weapon from the TWF feat and the -5 penalty for the second off-hand att from ITWF do the 2 penalties stack thus preserving the iterative rule?

[Thurbane]

The second off hand attack should be +7, not +9.

Are you sure? ITWF gives an extra attack at -5...is that -5 stacked with the -2 for TWF? I thought it was -5 to your BAB total, not -5 plus -2.

[krko]

Q151

Will a Maximized Fimbulwinter(Frostburn) have maximized duration? How about the daily rolls for wind and snowfall, are they affected too?

[Douglas]

Are you sure? ITWF gives an extra attack at -5...is that -5 stacked with the -2 for TWF? I thought it was -5 to your BAB total, not -5 plus -2.

Using two-weapon fighting at all imposes a -2 penalty on all attacks with the off hand. This penalty is not mentioned in the ITWF feat so it still applies, and since it is from a different source it stacks. Further, looking at the progression through ITWF, GTWF, and finishing with Perfect Two Weapon Fighting, the intent seems quite clear to give a progression of off-hand attacks that mirrors the main hand iteratives with each attack after the first having a bonus 5 worse than the one before.

[Human Paragon 3]

Q153 If a character is under the effects of a blink spell, but his weapon has the ghost touch property, do his attacks suffer a 20% miss chance?

[Douglas]

A153

Yes, he still suffers the 20% miss chance for his attacks. Ghost Touch works against incorporeal targets. Ethereal is something completely different, they're just commonly confused because force effects treat them the same and ghosts combine both in one creature.

[Thurbane]

Q 154

Are there any Rogue ACFs that trade Evasion for something that is not affected by medium or heavy armor?

[edit]Never mind, I found at least three[/edit]

A 154

• Feign Death (Exemplars of Evil)
• Spell Reflection (Complete Mage)
• Mettle of the Mountains (RoS - Goliath sub level)

[Fellfire]

That makes perfect sense. Y'all are geniuses. Thanks, Thurbane, douglas and Curmudgeon

[Dire Reverend]

Q155: Are there any boots or abilities found in any book that function similar to the Long Fall Boot from Portal 2? The Long Fall Boot negates all falling damage regardless of distance, and forces the person using them to always land on their feet. If a boot does one or the other, please let me know of that as well.

I know Feather Fall might give a similar use of preventing fall damage, but I am looking for one that passively negates fall damage.

[Fellfire]

Q156

I'm working on building sort of a bastardized 3.5/PF character using the Jaunter class from Expedition to the Demonweb and the Dimensional Dervish feat tree from Ultimate Combat. What I am wondering is the Jaunter class' Dimension Door ability...

Dimension Door (Sp): At 3rd level and higher, you can
use dimension door as the spell to move up to 30 feet per
day per jaunter level you possess. You need not move the
entire distance at once; you can move in increments of 10
feet any number of times until the total distance has been
traversed.

and the Dimensional Dervish feat am I able to dimension door using the dervish feat and gain a full attack after my teleport? And can I do this 12 times per day at 4th lvl if I break the hops into 10'? Does this work essentially the same way as some of the shadow pounce builds I've seen? Also, what use is the Dimensional Savant feat? Can I not get the flanking/SA bonus by just leaping behind my opponent?

[Sliver]

Q157

Are there any direct damage ways besides fire or acid to defeat a troll? Can a troll die from an Inflict spell?

Q158

Can you Coup de Grace with a touch spell, like Inflict? Does it have a chance to crit?

[Curmudgeon]

Re: Q 156

I'm afraid questions about combining aspects of D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder are outside the scope of what D&D 3.5 RAW can answer.

A 157 No.

The properties of a Troll's Regeneration ability specifically state that only fire and acid damage bypass it. All other forms of damage, including negative energy damage such as from an Inflict <x> Wounds spell, are converted to nonlethal damage.

A 158

The only normal ways of administering a coup de grace are with a melee weapon, or a bow/crossbow when adjacent to the target. All weaponlike spells (spells that require an attack roll and deal damage) normally threaten on a natural 20 and deal double damage on a critical hit, but cannot be used for a coup de grace.

[Psyren]

Q134c, d and e:
c) Does [Greater Concealing Amorpha] enable sneak attacks for its duration (both melee and ranged?)
d) Are you safe from attacks of opportunity while it is up?
e) Can you make Hide checks with it while out in the open?

Reposting.

Also, new topic Q159:

Magic of Incarnum states that the maximum essentia capacity of your soulmelds and feats is limited by your Con bonus. However, it only says this in the Expanded Soulmeld Capacity and Improved Essentia Capacity feats respectively. Does this limitation apply even if you do not take these feats?

[paurpg]

Q 160
Will a summoned swarm attack a level 6 necromancer with the arcane variant with undead apotheosis?
Q161
If you ready an attack as soon as someone with the invisible spell appears due to him attacking, can you attack him before he attacks you?

[Curmudgeon]

A 161

I'm not sure I understand your question, but I think I can answer it anyway. Readying an action doesn't involve divination magic; it's merely a plan and relies on the character's senses to determine when to put the plan into action.

If you're referring to someone using the Invisible Spell metamagic feat (Cityscape, page 61) and attacking with a spell, you would never be able to detect them using that feat because it does not alter the casting in any noticeable way; that answer would always be no.

If you're actually referring to someone who is invisible due to the Invisibility spell becoming visible after attacking, your readied action for this specific condition could not trigger unless you determined that they are invisible due to that specific spell (likely with a successful Spellcraft check), which would in turn require that you must be able to see or detect the effects of the spell while that spell was active (perhaps with See Invisibility, a divination spell). Given that both passive Spot checks and Spellcraft checks to identify a spell that’s already in place and in effect require no action, both of these could be accomplished without interfering with your readied action. The answer if you had these capabilities would be that yes, you could ready to attack them first when they attempted to attack you, before they became visually apparent.

If you're instead referring to readying an action to attack someone who attacks you while under an Invisibility spell and becomes visible as a consequence, but you do not have any capability of detecting them beforehand, then that answer is no. The Invisibility spell ends when someone attacks any creature. Your readied action, triggered by them appearing, must necessarily happen after that attack for the triggering condition to occur, so you cannot attack attack them first.

[Douglas]

A134

c No. The rules for total concealment do not of themselves deny dex bonus for your targets. You need to actually be invisible for that.

d Yes. Having total concealment prevents all AoOs against you.

e Probably not. Hide has two requirements: 1) either cover or concealment, and 2) you must not be observed at the time you hide. Greater Concealing Amorpha satisfies the first requirement but does not automatically satisfy the second.

A159

Maximum essentia capacity is normally determined exclusively by character level. The feats you mentioned can increase that limit, and constitution bonus is a special restriction on when their increase can apply.

A160

Assuming you're referring to this variant, yes it would. I'm not sure what gave you the idea that it might not.

A161

This is not completely clear, but I think the answer is no.

A readied action to "attack if he attacks me" would interrupt his attack, but depending on interpretation it would either not trigger (because you can't perceive his attack) or would trigger when he is still invisible, forcing you to deal with his 50% miss chance.

A readied action to "attack if he becomes visible" would "interrupt" the ending of the Invisibility spell, and by the time that happens his attack is already completed (I think; this is the part that isn't clear).

[Psyren]

A134

c No. The rules for total concealment do not of themselves deny dex bonus for your targets. You need to actually be invisible for that.

Are you sure? This Rules of the Game says any total concealment will do it. Or is that a mistake?

If this sparks a discussion I'll make a thread for it.