Simple Raw Thread for 3.5 #28

[Fax Celestis]

A55 - Amendment

While I would love for this to be true, as it would make WoF really good, I'm not sure if the italicized fluff text at the start of some spells counts as rules text.

A55Cont/A60 They do, otherwise there are several spells (such as rouse in PHB-II) that would do nothing.

A64B Unearthed Arcana has the Additional Favored Class feat.

[Khatoblepas]

Q60 Cont.

I'm not sure I'm seeing the dysfunction in Rouse. It affects creatures in the area by default:

A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, even including creatures that you can’t see.

And the text of the spell:

This spell awakens creatures from magical and nonmagical sleep.

It awakens creatures from magical and nonmagical sleep, and it affects whatever it catches in it's area. So it affects sleeping creatures in the spell's area. Is there a creature in the spell's area? Is the creature sleeping? Then it wakes it up.

[heavyfuel]

A 61B

A 61 B Correction

Untyped bonuses generally do stack with each other. They don't if they come from the same source. The source of a bonus is the ability that grants it. So this is the case here.

You are absolutely correct, I meant to type that they don't stack with themselves, not each other. I've edited it now.

[heavyfuel]

A 65
You can invest essentia in the feat without expending your focus, but this by itself does nothing. You can do this once per day.

When manifesting the power, if you expend your focus, regardless of the reason, then you get the benefits of the feat.

[Fax Celestis]

A60Cont Not sure where you're getting that: maybe your source is post-errata. The book reads:

Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]
[...]
Duration: Instantaneous
[...]
Area: 10-ft.-radius burst
[...]
With a loud snap of your fingers, you cause any sleeping creatures in the spell’s area to awaken.

This spell has no effect on creatures that are unconscious due to being reduced to negative hit points, or that have taken nonlethal damage in excess of their current hit points.

Italicized text is flavor text. Without said text, the spell does nothing.

[unseenmage]

Q68

A creature made invisible by a simple Invisibility spell tries to activate a scroll of Black Tentacles and fails, does the invisibility go away?

If it helps the bad guy is (assumed to be) invisible too and so far as the character knows is still in the room, which Black Tentacles would definitely fill completely.. Teleport is possible but the character doesn't know that. Which I mention in case intent is part of how Invisibility works.

[Fax Celestis]

A68 Yes, it ends. From invisibility:

The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe.

Since it uses "targeting" language, it doesn't matter if he fails or not: the spell had no effect, but he still targeted a foe or included a foe in the area of effect.

[unseenmage]

A68 Yes, it ends. From invisibility:



Since it uses "targeting" language, it doesn't matter if he fails or not: the spell had no effect, but he still targeted a foe or included a foe in the area of effect.

So that applies even if activating the scroll fails?

[Curmudgeon]

A 068 [partial correction]

Yes, it ends. From invisibility:
Since it uses "targeting" language, it doesn't matter if he fails or not: the spell had no effect, but he still targeted a foe or included a foe in the area of effect.

The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe.

The "Aiming a Spell" rules stipulate that targeting is not done until the end of casting.

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 casting ends unsuccessfully, you might not get a chance to select a target, or that selection may be ignored. Only if the mishap still targets the creature or includes the creature in the affected area will Invisibility end per its "attack" criteria.

Possible mishaps are given below.

• A surge of uncontrolled magical energy deals 1d6 points of damage per spell level to the scroll user.
• Spell strikes the scroll user or an ally instead of the intended target, or a random target nearby if the scroll user was the intended recipient.
• Spell takes effect at some random location within spell range.
• Spell’s effect on the target is contrary to the spell’s normal effect.
• The scroll user suffers some minor but bizarre effect related to the spell in some way. Most such effects should last only as long as the original spell’s duration, or 2d10 minutes for instantaneous spells.
• Some innocuous item or items appear in the spell’s area.
• Spell has delayed effect. Sometime within the next 1d12 hours, the spell activates. If the scroll user was the intended recipient, the spell takes effect normally. If the user was not the intended recipient, the spell goes off in the general direction of the original recipient or target, up to the spell’s maximum range, if the target has moved away.

A mishap which takes effect at some random location where there is no creature present, for instance, would not be an attack. The intent of the spellcaster may, or may not, matter.

[Khatoblepas]

Q60 Cont.

Yes, the errata says:

Page 123 – Rouse [Substitution]
Replace the spell description with the following
text: “This spell awakens creatures from magical
and nonmagical sleep. It has no effect on creatures
that are otherwise unconscious.”

The original spell does do nothing, but it is the errata that makes the spell do something. If the italic text made the spell do anything, it wouldn't need to be errata'd. If it was so, then the fluff text for Benign Transposition would have some weird effects:

Calling out the arcane words, you suddenly stand where your companion was, and he has taken your place, outside the reach of his foes.

What does this mean? Let's say you are standing 5ft away from the target of BT. You swap places, and are still threatened by the same enemy. Is he now outside the reach of his foe (enemy, as established earlier in this thread), even though he is still threatened by the enemy and in exactly the place where you were standing?

[Platymus Pus]

Seems there's a Defoliate spell in Pathfinder. If this is the spell meant then be aware there is a separate thread for Pathfinder questions.

I assumed there was some kind of dnd equivalent.
leaf armor is dnd item itself. Hybrid game.

[Fax Celestis]

A60Cont This is getting outside the scope of this thread. You should start a new thread to discuss it.

[Harlot]

Q69 - inspired by Q&A 68

My friends SOP as caster is making himself invisible, then summon monsters or whatever to attack in his stead.
Because since he does not directly attack anyone he is still invisible?
Is this correct?
EDIT: Answered, below, thanks!

[Andezzar]

A 69

Yup.

The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. (Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character’s perceptions.) Actions directed at unattended objects do not break the spell. Causing harm indirectly is not an attack. Thus, an invisible being can open doors, talk, eat, climb stairs, summon monsters and have them attack, cut the ropes holding a rope bridge while enemies are on the bridge, remotely trigger traps, open a portcullis to release attack dogs, and so forth. If the subject attacks directly, however, it immediately becomes visible along with all its gear.

[Cardea]

Q 70

Can Martial Study increase how many Maneuvers you can ready? If not, is there anything that can?

[heavyfuel]

A 70.

No. You can check the Idiot Crusader build for ways to increase Maneuvers Readied.

[AvatarVecna]

Q71

Templates from 3.0 virtually never have LA; that said, a number of 3.5 templates have no listed LA, such as the Unseelie Fey. Are templates of this nature, by RAW, restricted from PC use, or are they available by virtue of no rule saying that they aren't?

[Fax Celestis]

A71 the raw is silent on this matter, but the only sensible reading is to interpret the absence of an LA line as LA —.

[Andezzar]

A 71 Contention

All (or nearly all I haven't checked each and everyone of them) templates have such lines:

[Template Name] is an [acquired/inherited] template that can be added to any [list of suitable creatures] (referred to hereafter as the base creature). [templated creature] uses all the base creature’s statistics and abilities except as noted here.

A template does not take anything away unless explicitly noted. So a template lacking an LA entry would not change the LA of the base creature, because the template does not remove the LA. The templated creature would still have LA of the base creature. It gets a bit more complicated for 3.0 content. Updated content follows the same rule as above, unupdated content is subject to DM tweaks (which could include adding an LA statistic).

If you do not follow the above procedure, you would have to apply the the removal of statistics not mentioned in the template description to all other statistics as well. So you would have to remove the movement statistic for any template that does not specify any movement for example. That would be just silly.

[Curmudgeon]

A 071 additional info

From page 4 of 3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide:

This is an upgrade of the d20 System, not a new edition of the game. This revision is compatible with all existing products, and those products can be used with the revision with only minor adjustments.

This is the basic rule for using older material in a 3.5 game, so ask your DM if they feel it necessary to make any minor adjustments to non-updated 3.0 material. Adding a "Level Adjustment: <whatever>" line would be such an adjustment.

As for the specific example template, Unseelie Fey is LA: +0; combine Dragon Compendium and its Errata file, and look at the sample creature.

[ILM]

A 59

You can make an item like this by following the item creation guideline.

Since Darkness is a level 2 spell (unless you can get a Telflammar Shadowlord to make as a 1st level spell), has a minimum CL of 3 and lasts for 10min/lv, a continuous Eye lenses or Goggles of Darkness should cost 2*3*2000*1.5, which is 18'000,00 GP. If you choose another body slot not related to vision, you an make it for 27'000,00 GP.

If you do get a Tf Shadowlord to make you one, it should cost 3000 GP for Eye lenses/goggles or 4500 GP for a different slot.

A59 cont': Actually, since Deeper Darkness has a loooong duration (1 day/lvl), it's cheaper to go with that: 3*5*2000/2 or 15,000 gp, and you get a higher CL. Hell, if you had Cleric levels or high UMD, you could make a 1/day wand for 3*5*750/5 or 2,250 gp...

[AvatarVecna]

Q72

The Feral template from Savage Species has a minimum of Int 2. Seeing as through template abuse and/or terrible rolls, this is well within the bounds of possibility. By RAW, what effect does possessing an Int of 2 have on an adventurer? Can they level up, take feats, learn civilized skills?

[OMG PONIES]

A 70 additional: Extra Readied Maneuver (ToB pg 30) is exactly what you're looking for, but only if you're a swordsage.

[Curmudgeon]

A 072 N/A.

Intelligence does not go below 3 for characters. Savage Species disagrees with Player's Handbook here (see page 11), and the Primary Sources Errata Rule says the PH is correct.

Spoiler: Primary Sources Errata Rule

Show

Errata Rule: Primary Sources

When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The Dungeon Master's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.

[heavyfuel]

Q 73

How many attacks does Snap Kick grant in each scenario:
-TWF with unarmed strikes, 6BAB; the full attack is 4 unarmed attacks
-TWFwith a weapon in one hand and nothing in the other, 6BAB; the full attack is 2 attacks with weapons, and 2 unarmed strike


Q 74

If fighting with a weapon in one hand and unarmed with the other, can one gaint the benefit of the Einhander feat? Even if he's attacking with both hands?

[Andezzar]

A 73

The unarmed strike is only one weapon you cannot use two-weapon fighting with it alone. So in that case you would get -2 (UAS) -2 (Snap Kick) -7 (UAS)

You can use TWF with a weapon in one hand and the Unarmed Strike. Only if you have the Improved Two-Weapon feat can you get two attacks with your "off-hand". If that is the case you get:
-4 (weapon), -4 (UAS), -4 (Snap Kick), -9 (weapon), -9 (UAS) I used the Unarmed strike as the off-hand weapon to ensure that the off-hand weapon is light. Without improved TWF drop the -9 UAS. Without any feat the penalties would be considerably worse.

A 74

Yes.

[Bronk]

Khatoblepas: Unless I'm wrong, I do think this is how it works.

Bjoern: Wow. If that's how WoF works then its a piece of crap spell.

A55Cont/A60 They do, otherwise there are several spells (such as rouse in PHB-II) that would do nothing.

A55/A60 continued re: wings of flurry

The area of the spell is a 30' burst, the range of the spell is 30', and the flavor text of the spell indicates that wings unfurl from your own back, so the affected area is always a full sphere or hemisphere (on land) pretty much centered on you, not the smaller blue area indicated in Khatoblepas' picture.

[Andezzar]

A55/A60 continued re: wings of flurry

The area of the spell is a 30' burst, the range of the spell is 30', and the flavor text of the spell indicates that wings unfurl from your own back, so the affected area is always a full sphere or hemisphere (on land) pretty much centered on you, not the smaller blue area indicated in Khatoblepas' picture.

The effect is not necessarily centered on the caster:

Some spells affect an area. Sometimes a spell description specifies a specially defined area, but usually an area falls into one of the categories defined below.

Regardless of the shape of the area, you select the point where the spell originates, but otherwise you don’t control which creatures or objects the spell affects.
[...]
Burst, Emanation, or Spread

Most spells that affect an area function as a burst, an emanation, or a spread. In each case, you select the spell’s point of origin and measure its effect from that point.

No part of the description of Wings of Flurry invalidates the general rule about range:

A spell’s range indicates how far from you it can reach, as defined in the Range entry of the spell description. A spell’s range is the maximum distance from you that the spell’s effect can occur, as well as the maximum distance at which you can designate the spell’s point of origin. If any portion of the spell’s area would extend beyond this range, that area is wasted.

So the spell would indeed produce the area shown in the picture if the point of origin was placed 30 ft from the caster.

[Reshy]

Q75

If you have two sources of flight, which do you keep? The newest, the best speed, the best maneuverability, or both?

[Andezzar]

A 75

You keep all of them and decide on a case by case basis which to use. The rules neither allow nor forbid to detach maneuverability from fly speed.