Simple Raw Thread for 3.5 #28

[Curmudgeon]

A 156 No.

In natural darkness (pitch black) the creature would see in black and white (due to Darkvision). In magical darkness (shadowy illumination) the creature would see normally, in color (due to Ebon Eyes).

A 157 Yes.

"Pinpointing" in D&D always means you have identified the square(s) in which a creature exists, but cannot see it; you therefore have a 50% miss chance due to total concealment. The sense (other than sight) used for pinpointing does not change the end result.

[heavyfuel]

RE A157

A 157 Yes.

"Pinpointing" in D&D always means you have identified the square(s) in which a creature exists, but cannot see it; you therefore have a 50% miss chance due to total concealment. The sense (other than sight) used for pinpointing does not change the end result.

That's what I was thinking, but couldn't find any rules quote on this. Could you get me one?

[Oddman80]

A 155 No.

A dive attack works like a Charge, but is a different action. Abilities which specifically refer to Charge do not apply to dive attacks.

Not to nitpick, but the text says that:

A dive attack works just like a charge, but the diving creature must move a minimum of 30 feet and descend at least 10 feet.

Sure its just one word different. But your version of the quote infers that dive attacks are just similar to charges. But as the text says "just like a charge" , it can be assumed they are the same in every way other than different movement restrictions described at the end of the sentence.

[Belkarseviltwin]

Q 158

An Archivist with only Summon Nature's Ally I in his prayerbook has the Spontaneous Summoner feat. Can he use this to cast higher-level Summon Nature's Ally spells?

[Thurbane]

A 158

The feat allows you to spontaneously cast SNA spells "just as a druid can" (up to your Wis modifier times/day).

Spontaneous Casting: A druid can channel stored spell energy into summoning spells that she hasn’t prepared ahead of time. She can “lose” a prepared spell in order to cast any summon nature’s ally spell of the same level or lower.

The ability says nothing about having to know the SNA of appropriate level, so yes, by RAW an Archivist with SNA 1 can lose a memorized spell of any level 1 through 9 and swap it for the equivalent level Summon Nature's Ally (i.e. a 7th level Archivist could sacrifice a prepared Divine Power to cast Summon Nature's Ally IV, so long as he has ANY level SNA spell in his Prayerbook of a level which he may cast).

[Quiet Wizard]

Q 159

My wizard casts Shadow Conjuration ... to mimic the Clothier's Closet spell (Magic of Eberron, p. 94).

As long as my wizard and my party companions all purposely disbelieve (and fail the Will save), do we all have access to this plethora of custom-selected "shadow" outfits?

I just want to make sure that the support rod and the outfits conjured/created from Shadow Conjuration are in fact accessible and not weirdly affected by the last line of the Shadow Conjuration spell that states: "Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell."

[Thurbane]

Q 160

Is an SLA always a standard action, even if the spell it emulates has a casting time of 1 immediate action, 1 full round action, or 1 hour?

Citation required please.

Cheers - T

[heavyfuel]

A 160

pg 118 of Rules Compendium

Using a spell-like ability usually takes 1 standard action and provokes attacks of opportunity unless otherwise noted. If the spell-like ability duplicates a spell that has a casting time of less than 1 standard action, the spell-like ability has that casting time.

So you can use SLA that emulate swift/immediate action spells by using equal action cost. Since the rules don't mention SLAs with longer "casting time", then it's the default Standard Action, unless otherwise noted.

[Karnith]

A 160 (con't)

If you take the Core books/the SRD to have precedence over RC (or if you just don't use RC), spell-like abilities have the same casting/activation time as the spells they emulate. Per the SRD:

A spell-like ability takes the same amount of time to complete as the spell that it mimics (usually 1 standard action) unless otherwise stated.

[Curmudgeon]

A 159 20% of the time.

Shadow objects or substances have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them.

Against disbelievers, they are 20% likely to work.

If the characters "all purposely disbelieve" as you state, the Clothier's Closet will only work 20% of the time for them (i.e., 4 out of 5 castings they won't get any clothes).

I think what you're trying to get at is characters purposely trying to believe the Illusion is real. However, there's a rule against that:

A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw.

If you already know it's a Shadow Conjuration spell (an Illusion), you don't need (i.e., don't get) a saving throw; you automatically disbelieve, and then 20% of the time the spell will produce a real effect for you because it's a quasi-real Illusion.

[PraxisVetli]

Q161
Is there a way to wield a double weapon as TWF?

[Fax Celestis]

A161 The Two-Weapon Fighting special attack has special rules for a double weapon:

Double Weapons
You can use a double weapon to make an extra attack with the off-hand end of the weapon as if you were fighting with two weapons. The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon were a light weapon.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/spe...WeaponFighting

Note how it only specifies the penalties from fighting with two weapons are determined as if your off-hand were a light weapon. Positive benefits (such as determining your Strength modifier to damage and qualifying for Power Attack) still apply.

[Andezzar]

A 161

Not sure what you are asking. It is possible to wield one appropriately sized double weapon as if the ends of the weapon were a one-handed and a light weapon. It is also possible to wield two double weapons that are sized for a creature one category smaller than the wielder as two one-handed weapons with all the penalties associated with doing that (-6 to both hands if the wielder has the TWF feat). In this case the wielder can only use one end of each of the weapons.

Q 162

Does a finessable double-weapon exist?

[Fax Celestis]

A162 Lynxpaw, RotW. In OA (so 3.0), there's the Kawanaga and Kusari-Gama. SS has the Chain Lash.

[Quiet Wizard]

A 159 20% of the time.
If the characters "all purposely disbelieve" as you state, the Clothier's Closet will only work 20% of the time for them (i.e., 4 out of 5 castings they won't get any clothes).

I think what you're trying to get at is characters purposely trying to believe the Illusion is real. However, there's a rule against that: If you already know it's a Shadow Conjuration spell (an Illusion), you don't need (i.e., don't get) a saving throw; you automatically disbelieve, and then 20% of the time the spell will produce a real effect for you because it's a quasi-real Illusion.

Wow. That's pretty profound. There's a ton of threads on all the 3.5 forums advocating the use of Shadow Conjuration to mimic buff spells (like Greater Mage Armor) and utility spells (like Phantom Steed). Your ruling makes sense. But it absolutely demolishes the optimization advice of Shadow Conjuration spell advocates everywhere!

Thank you, Curmudgeon.

[Khatoblepas]

A159 Cont.

Though what Illusionist worth their salt isn't taking advantage of Chains of Disbelief?

Chains of Disbelief (Ex)

Even if a viewer disbelieves an illusion created by an illusionist using this variant and communicates the details of the illusion to other creatures, those other creatures do not receive the normal +4 bonus on their saying throws to disbelieve the illusion. Furthermore, even when presented with incontrovertible proof that the illusion isn't real, creatures must still succeed on a Will saving throw to see objects or creatures that the illusion obscures, although they get a +10 bonus on the saving throw.

Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw

A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell’s result. Even a character with a special resistance to magic can suppress this quality.

Though:

Q163
I'm not sure what the order of operations is for voluntarily giving up a saving throw - Can you give up the saving throw for an illusion spell, while you know it's an illusion? The spell says that someone who has proof that it is an illusion doesn't need a saving throw, but I'm not sure that's enough to overcome forgoing a saving throw.

[Fax Celestis]

Q164 Can a runescarred berserker use metamagic? What about qualify for prestige classes that require the ability to cast spells? Prestige classes that require the ability to prepare spells?

[nyjastul69]

Q 165: Does a Factotum need to have an opponent denied dex to AC, or flanked, to get SA damage from the Cunning Strike ability?

[Oddman80]

Q 166

If a medium runescarred berserker has had Enlarge Person permanancied unto him (to make him large) and then activated one of his scars that was storing the Righteous Might spell, would he become Huge?

And, if so, when the Righteous Might spell's duration came to an end, would he return to medium or large size?

[Curmudgeon]

A 159 Cont.

Though what Illusionist worth their salt isn't taking advantage of Chains of Disbelief?

Chains of Disbelief will force a save to see things obscured by the illusion; it won't do anything for nonobscured items created by the illusion. No save needed is still no save.

A 163

The order of operations is irrelevant. If you don't get a save, options relating to what you could do if you did get a save don't apply.

A 165 Yes.

The Factotum class doesn't define sneak attack, so you use the existing definition in the primary source book (Player's Handbook, page 50) or SRD equivalent here. Cunning Strike enables 1d6 sneak attack damage; it doesn't make up some new form of precision damage with different rules. All the standard restrictions for sneak attack apply as usual.

A 166 No.

Multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack.

Multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack.

[HurinTheCursed]

Q 167 a

If you use Never outnumbered, does it apply around you or around your target ?

Spoiler: Never outnumbered

Show

Never outnumbered
When you use Intimidate to demoralize an opponent (PH 76), you can affect all enemies within 10 feet that can see you, rather than only a single enemy you threaten. Each enemy rolls a separate modified level check to oppose your Intimidate check, but the skill check otherwise works as normal.
10 ft of you or the opponent you try to intimidare

Q 167 b

If you use Intimidating rage and Never outnumbered, can you intimidate one enemy 30 feet around you and all others 10 feet around or only 10 feet around ? How long does the intimidate effect last for the enemies 10 feet around ?

Spoiler: Intimidating rage

Show

Intimidating rage
While you are raging, you designate a single foe within 30feet of you that you can attempt to demoralize as a free action (see the intimidate skill page 76 of the Player's Handbook). A foe that you successfully demoralize remains shaken for as long as you continue to rage. You may only use this feat against a single foe in any particular encounter.

[Jowgen]

Q 168

A character with a +2 LA reaches class level 6 when his ECL hits 8. He pays 7000 exp to have his level adjustment reduced to a +1. Does loosing this exp thusly throw him back to class level 5, making his ECL 5 CL + 1 LA = 6?

EDIT: scratch that math, at class level 6, this character would only have 15000 exp, so paying 7000 would put him down to 8000, which is 2000 exp under class-level 5. So his ECL would be 5 (CL 4 + 1 LA) until he earns those 2000 exp, and then 6 (CL 5 + 1 LA) until he earns another 5000 (if I'm reading the charts right this time).

[Thurbane]

Q 169

If you are trying to hide from a creature, and are unsure whether it has spotted you (but is "playing dumb" and pretending that it hasn't), I assume it would normally be a Sense Motive check (by the hider) vs. a Bluff check (by the spotter) to determine the truth.

But assuming the spotter hasn't actually detected the hider, what sort of check should be made then? Is it possible for the hider to reach an incorrect assumption?

[Oddman80]

Q 170
If one wanted to permanently do the Girallon's Blessing + Fuse Arms trick for an unamed bonus to (arm) strength, would you need to cast permanency on both the Girallon's Blessing Spell and the Fuse Arms spell? or could you just cast it on the Fuse Arms spell?

[Kred]

Q 171
Psicrystal Containment
Can i expend my and psicrystal's focus at the same time (to activate 2 feats)?

[Oddman80]

Q 172a
If you have multiple spells permanencied onto you, and a caster casts Dispel Magic targeted on you - does it only apply to one spell per casting, or does a single casting allow dispel attempts on every spell that currently has an effect on you?

Q172b
Assuming the permanency of both Garillon's Blessing & Fuse Arms, would a casting of Dispel Magic only affect the Fuse Arms, as the multiple limbs of Garillon's blessing aren't present during the time of the casting of Dispel.

[heavyfuel]

Q 173

Are Azurins humans for purpose of Favored Enemy?

[Fax Celestis]

A167A The text is unclear, and the errata doesn't address this issue. However, the way the trick is described and pictured indicates that Never Outnumbered centers its effect upon your target, rather than on you. Still, ask your DM.

A167B The former: you may Intimidate one opponent within 30', and all within 10' of the target (assuming your DM agrees with the answer to A167A.

A168 Your second assumption is correct. However, he would also gain an increased amount of experience from encounters due to being a lower level than the rest of the party.

A169 There are no rules I am aware of that can determine this situation, aside from the vague wording of the Hunch feature of Sense Motive.

Hunch (DC 20)
This use of the skill involves making a gut assessment of the social situation. You can get the feeling from another’s behavior that something is wrong, such as when you’re talking to an impostor. Alternatively, you can get the feeling that someone is trustworthy.

A reasonable interpretation of this ability would be to allow a hiding creature to get a hunch about the sentry's awareness of him. However, the DM should roll this in secret (like many other rolls that have character-unknowable results).

A170 Both. Fuse arms would suppress (not dispel or discharge) as soon as the girallon's blessing wore off, as the creature would no longer be a valid target. You could permanency fuse arms, but you'd only get the effects when you had girallon's blessing or another arm- or tentacle-granting effect active.

A171 Yes.

A172A Each effect is dispelled independently.

Targeted Dispel
One object, creature, or spell is the target of the dispel magic spell. You make a dispel check (1d20 + your caster level, maximum +10) against the spell or against each ongoing spell currently in effect on the object or creature. The DC for this dispel check is 11 + the spell’s caster level. If you succeed on a particular check, that spell is dispelled; if you fail, that spell remains in effect.

If you target an object or creature that is the effect of an ongoing spell (such as a monster summoned by monster summoning), you make a dispel check to end the spell that conjured the object or creature.

If the object that you target is a magic item, you make a dispel check against the item’s caster level. If you succeed, all the item’s magical properties are suppressed for 1d4 rounds, after which the item recovers on its own. A suppressed item becomes nonmagical for the duration of the effect. An interdimensional interface (such as a bag of holding) is temporarily closed. A magic item’s physical properties are unchanged: A suppressed magic sword is still a sword (a masterwork sword, in fact). Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this.

You automatically succeed on your dispel check against any spell that you cast yourself.

A172B Girallon's blessing, despite not being visible, is still an active effect on the targeted creature, and as such would be eligible for dispelling via a targeted dispel magic.

A173 Yes. Azurins are Humanoid (Human, Incarnum) and as such are treated as Humans for spells, effects, and prerequisites that specifically require Humans.

[Oddman80]

I'll try to make these my last question for a while...

Q 174a
Does the caster of Dispell Magic need to know what it is he is trying to dispel? Or does it automatically trigger the opposed checks for everything that is currently active on the target?

Q 174b
If Garillon's Blessing and Fuse Arms were cast off of a pair of Level 3 scrolls, and then a level 20 sorcerer cast
permanency on both of the spells, Is the DC of the Dispel Magic attempt to get rid of the two original spells going to be 31 (based on the heightened caster level of the permanency spell) or 16 (11 + min caster level 5 for the scrolls)?

Q 174c
Is it impossible to dispel something that had been cast by someone with a caster level of 20 (DC 31)? Or would a natural 20 be an auto-success even though the dispel check is 1d20 + caster level (maximum +10)?

[AlanBruce]

Q. 175

Regarding the Mudslide spell (Stormwrack), the spell says it covers a large area (40ft. radius spread).

Would the spell:

1. Target airborne enemies

2. Be subject to Damage Reduction (it's described as an avalanche of mud falling on an area, so I thought it would be bludgeoning, at a closest approximate)

3. Being an isntantaneous effect (a large pile of mud), could weather conditions thin out the spell's area (like a severe rainstorm or being cast underwater, which would cause the mud to float around)

4. Could someone caught beneath the mudslide have cover against someone trying to attack it?