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

[Jowgen]

Q 459a

What exactly is the difference -if any- between Touchstones (Sandstorm) and Planar Touchstones (Planar Handbook)?

What confuses me is if the Sandstorm rules and Feat are meant as an update to the Planar Handbook ones, or if they're separate/compatible/exclusive. Could someone with the Planar Touchstone feat connect with a Sandstorm Touchstone and/or vice-versa? What about serving as prerequisites?

Q 459b

How does the base ability of the Oxyhynchus touchstone (Planar Handbook) work in detail?

Does it only trigger when an opponent is flat-footed, or can other instances where an opponent is unable to "effectively defend" trigger as well? Does it work when making AoO against a flat-footed opponent? The last sentence talks about being able to make more than one extra attack if one has a high-enough BaB, does this also apply if one has extra attacks from other sources?

[Andezzar]

A 458

Close Fighting Blade (RotW p. 166 f.). The penalty is to both uses though.

[OMG PONIES]

A 459. Since 459 and its subdivisions were actually asking seven separate questions, I've broken them out by subject below:

A 459a (re: the difference between touchstones and planar touchstones): They are sites on two separate but compatible lists from two different sources.

A 459b (re: using Touchstone feat to connect to Planar touchstone sites and vice versa): Yes, but not vice versa. If you've taken the Planar Touchstone feat, the text only allows you to connect to other planar touchstone feats. The text of the Touchstone feat is not as restrictive, though:

Once you’ve established a link with one planar touchstone site by taking this feat, you may also freely visit other planar touchstones.

Those linked with one touchstone can also freely visit other touchstone sites, including planar touchstones (as described in the Planar Handbook).

A 459c (re: using Touchstone or Planar Touchstone in place of each other for prerequisites): No. The feats have different names and different prerequisites of their own, so they are clearly two different (but similar) feats. Absent any specific language stating that, for instance, you could use "Touchstone" as a prerequisite to "Stalwart Planar Ally" instead of "Planar Touchstone," you'd need to use the specific feat named.

A 459d (re: how Oxyrhynchus works in detail): the text of the base ability is as follows:

Base Ability: Choose a weapon with which you are proficient. If you can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from your attack (i.e., flat-footed) with your chosen weapon, you can make an additional free attack at your base attack bonus –5. You can make this extra attack during any round that you can make multiple attacks, but only with your chosen weapon type. This means that if you are of a high enough level to make additional attacks (you have at least a +6 or higher base attack bonus), you could make two additional attacks at your base attack bonus –5.

A 459e (re: when this base ability is triggered): It only triggers when an opponent is flatfooted and you can make multiple attacks in the same round. The text of the base ability is as above. The text uses "i.e." before "flat-footed;" that abbreviation is exclusive and finite...think of it as saying "in essence" or "in other words." If flat-footedness had been one example from a list of others, "e.g." would have been the appropriate abbreviation.

A 459f (re: attacks of opportunity vs flatfooed opponents): Yes, but only if you can make multiple attacks in the same round. The second-to-last sentence indicates that if you cannot make multiple attacks in the same round, you cannot use the ability. However, if you satisfy the conditions for using the ability, the text does not discriminate between regular attacks and attacks of opportunity.

A 459g (re: sources of additional attacks): Ask your DM. The text of the last sentence is unclear on whether it is one example among many for the second-to-last sentence or a restating of the entire meaning of the second-to-last sentence. For example, by the wording of the last sentence, someone with a BAB of +15/+10/+5 (at least a +6 or higher BAB) only make two additional attacks (as stated in the text's last sentence) while it seems that may not have been the intent. Due to hazy wording and unclear intention on the last sentence, this part of the question has eclipsed the scope of this thread. A new thread may yield additional opinions.

[Jowgen]

A459 Appreciation

Thank you OMG PONIES for your swift and comprehensive answers, and my apology for their less-than-ideal sud-divising

[heavyfuel]

Q 460
Can I use Versatile Spellcaster to "sacrifice" two spells from one class to cast a spell from another?

Imagine a Favored Soul 4/Sorcerer 4/. I sacrifice two 1st level spells from FS to cast one 2nd level spell from Sorc.

Q 460 B
Does this work for prepared Casters? If the guy is a Sorcerer 4/Cleric 3, can I sacrifice two spells 1st level Sorcerer spells to cast one 2nd level Cleric spell?

Q 460 C
If I already met the requirement for Versatile Spellcaster, can I sacrifice prepared spells? Say, the Sorcerer/Cleric: Can he sacrifice two of his 1st level spells for a 2nd level spell even if he's a prepared caster?

[Tryxx]

Q 461

Can a flying Warlock use Eldritch Glaive in conjunction with the the Great Flyby Attack feat from Savage Species?

[Andezzar]

A 461

No. Creating and using the eldrich glaive is a specific full round action. Using Great fly-by attack is a different full round action.

[ChaosArchon]

Q 462 Can the additional domains named in the Divine Rules section in the SRD be used by normal clerics or do they have to have a divine rank? I'm making new gods for my setting and was wondering if I can use some of those domains for their clerics to use.

[Balor01]

Q 463 Found answer.

[Curmudgeon]

A 462

These domains are Clerical domains, and may be used by any Cleric whose deity has that domain in their portfolio. However, those domains from Deities and Demigods were published as OGC in the early days of D&D 3.5, and all have been updated elsewhere:

• Artifice Domain (Eberron Campaign Setting 104)
• Charm Domain (Spell Compendium 271)
• Community Domain (Spell Compendium 271-272)
• Creation Domain (Spell Compendium 272)
• Darkness Domain (Spell Compendium 272)
• Glory Domain (Spell Compendium 274)
• Liberation Domain (Spell Compendium 276)
• Madness Domain (Spell Compendium 276)
• Nobility Domain (Spell Compendium 277)
• Repose Domain (Player's Guide to Faerûn)
• Rune Domain (Spell Compendium 279)
• Scalykind Domain (Spell Compendium 279)
• Weather Domain (Eberron Campaign Setting 108)

[ChaosArchon]

A 462

These domains are Clerical domains, and may be used by any Cleric whose deity has that domain in their portfolio. However, those domains from Deities and Demigods were published as OGC in the early days of D&D 3.5, and all have been updated elsewhere:

• Artifice Domain (Eberron Campaign Setting 104)
• Charm Domain (Spell Compendium 271)
• Community Domain (Spell Compendium 271-272)
• Creation Domain (Spell Compendium 272)
• Darkness Domain (Spell Compendium 272)
• Glory Domain (Spell Compendium 274)
• Liberation Domain (Spell Compendium 276)
• Madness Domain (Spell Compendium 276)
• Nobility Domain (Spell Compendium 277)
• Repose Domain (Player's Guide to Faerûn)
• Rune Domain (Spell Compendium 279)
• Scalykind Domain (Spell Compendium 279)
• Weather Domain (Eberron Campaign Setting 108)

Thank you very much, hopefully my players enjoy playing with some of the rarer domains!

[OMG PONIES]

A 460: Yes, as long as both classes have a list of spells known and you know spells of the appropriate level. The example you provided with the Favored Soul/Sorcerer would work.

You can use two spell slots of the same level to cast a spell you know that is one level higher. For example, a sorcerer with this feat can expend two 2nd-level spell slots to cast any 3rd-level spell he knows.

Emphasis mine.

A 460 B: No. Prepared casters don't have a "spells known" mechanic.

If you’re a cleric, druid, experienced paladin, experienced ranger, or wizard, you select from among spells prepared earlier in the day and not yet cast (see Preparing Wizard Spells and Preparing Divine Spells). If you’re a bard or sorcerer, you can select any spell you know, provided you are capable of casting spells of that level or higher.

A 460 C: Yes. You only need to sacrifice spell slots, which even prepared casters use. You gain the ability to cast a spell known, so the spell gained must be from a class that has a list of spells known. The sorcerer/cleric in your example could sacrifice 2 1st-level cleric spells, but he'd have to use them to cast a 2nd-level sorcerer spell.

The character class tables show how many spells of each level a character can cast per day. These openings for daily spells are called spell slots.

[Andezzar]

A 460 B: No. Prepared casters don't have a "spells known" mechanic.

You are mistaken:

known spell

A spell that an arcane spellcaster has learned and can prepare. For wizards, knowing a spell means having it in their spellbooks. For sorcerers and bards, knowing a spell means having selected it when acquiring new spells as a benefit of level advancement.

[OMG PONIES]

A460b clarification: Versatile Spellcaster allows spell slots to be sacrificed in exchange for spells known for prepared arcane casters, but prepared divine casters (as in the example provided) still have no "spells known" mechanic. Thank you for providing the additional citation regarding spells known for arcane casters; however, the additional citation would not apply in the example provided. Versatile Spellcaster thus still cannot be used to sacrifice Favored Soul slots in order to cast cleric spells.

[Curmudgeon]

Re: A 460b clarification

Versatile Spellcaster allows spell slots to be sacrificed in exchange for spells known for prepared arcane casters, but prepared divine casters (as in the example provided) still have no "spells known" mechanic.

There is a place in the rules which (indirectly) specifies when a divine spellcaster "knows" a spell: if they're ready to cast it.

Benefit: You can create a scroll of any spell that you know.

We know that divine spellcasters can create scrolls, and that the magic item creation process requires casting the necessary spell each day while that item is being created. Consequently, if they are ready to cast a spell, then (at least for the purposes of Scribe Scroll) they "know" that spell.

Putting this together, a prepared divine caster can use Versatile Spellcaster as specified, but only if the resulting higher-level spell duplicates one that the character already has ready to cast.

[Andezzar]

Q 464

We know that divine spellcasters can create scrolls, and that the magic item creation process requires casting the necessary spell each day while that item is being created. Consequently, if they are ready to cast a spell, then (at least for the purposes of Scribe Scroll) they "know" that spell.

How do we know that?

[Curmudgeon]

A 464

We know that at least Clerics, Druids, Rangers, and Paladins can create scrolls because there are tables listing the costs for scrolls crafted by them and for the costs they need to pay to scribe those scrolls; see CREATING SCROLLS on page 287 of Dungeon Master's Guide. (At the moment I'm coming up short on an explicit generalization of that for other divine spellcasters. )

[Cyanide]

Can't recall if this one has already been asked, so...
Q 465 Would a Monk/Swordsage gain two bonuses to his AC equal to his WIS modifier, as per the two class features (in this specific instance the DM has ruled that Swordsage's WIS bonus to AC class feature also works when not wearing any armor, so take that into account)

[Curmudgeon]

A 465 No.

The bonuses come from the same source — AC Bonus — and thus don't stack.

Stacking

In most cases, modifiers to a given check or roll stack (combine for a cumulative effect) if they come from different sources and have different types (or no type at all), but do not stack if they have the same type or come from the same source (such as the same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a particular roll do not stack, only the best bonus and worst penalty applies.

Sources are specified by name, and the names are identical here.

[Banaticus]

Q 466 I cast Vertigo Field with a duration of 1 round/level (not a duration of concentration). To dismiss or otherwise get rid of that spell before its duration would normally end, what sort of action is required?

[questionmark693]

A 466

It is a standard action, assuming said spell can be dispelled early, as per the srd.

[Andezzar]

A 466 Addendum

If the spell does not have a (D) after the duration, you can use dispel magic to remove the spell, with 100% success rate. This also requires a standard action.

[Delcor]

Q 467

If I am dual wielding and have "superior two weapon fighting", but have a BAB that is less than 6, how many attacks do I get?

[Jowgen]

Q 468

How visible/invisible are Force effects/attacks/objects?

[Khedrac]

A 467

One on a standard action
Two - one with each weapon - on a full round action.

[Khedrac]

A 468

Generally speaking Force effects are visible unless the description explicitly states otherwise.

[Andezzar]

A 467 Addendum

There is no feat called superior two weapon fighting. Improved/Greater Two-Weapon Fighting cannot be acquired without a BAB of at least +6/+11. So you would have one attack with the main hand and one with the off hand on a Full Attack or one with either hand any other time. The penalties to either attack on a Full Attack depend on the weapons used and whether you have the Two-Weapon Fighting Feat.

[Curmudgeon]

Re: A 467 Addendum

There is no feat called superior two weapon fighting.

It's a racial ability of the Ettin, not a feat.

[allcool]

Q 469 Binder can gain two different gaze attacks as supernatural abilities. Are both this attacks active at the same time (and enemies make two different saving throws against each of them), or binder must chose one gaze attack he use? Or, maybe, attacks should be combined in some way?

[Jowgen]

A 468

Generally speaking Force effects are visible unless the description explicitly states otherwise.

A 468 Citation request

Is there a cite-able source that supports this (instead of the alternative of Force effects being invisible unless stated otherwise)?