Simple RAW Thread for 3.5: 30. Really? 30?

[AvatarVecna]

Q371

Do "humans" have an official, RAW creature type? If so, what is it, and do you have any proof?

[Myou]

Q 372 If a warlock uses a mortalbane eldritch admixture maximised eldritch blast, which parts of the attack, if any, does he still roll damage for?

Q 373 Which sources of damage are mlutiplied on a critical hit? Sneak attack is not but power attack is, so what about, say, iaijutsu damage or the searing blade manoeuvre, which adds 2d6+x damage, where x is the initiator level of the user.

[Curmudgeon]

A 371 Humanoid.

From page 27 of Player's Handbook:

Centaur bards sometimes train the children of humans or other humanoids.

[Troacctid]

A 371

Humans are humanoids with the human subtype. This isn't mentioned in their entry in the Races section of the Player's Handbook, but it's referenced indirectly in some other places, such as this section from a sidebar in Races of Destiny.

At the DM's discretion, half-human and humanlike races can be grouped together with humans as humanoids with the human subtype (rather than their own subtype).

There are also other spots here and there that refer to "humans and other humanoids" or the like, and all NPC human statblocks are marked as humanoids.

[kkplx]

Q 374

I hope this isn't too open-ended:
What counterplay does exist for Thicket of Blades? As in, how can you ignore its effects?

[Andezzar]

A 372

Only the normal damage from the eldritch blast is maximized, because the extra damage is not part of the SLA. The feat does not modify damage from other sources.

A 373

Extra damage is multiplied, extra damage dice are not. In the case of 2d6+x the x is multiplied the rest is not.

[Troacctid]

A 374

Teleporting will get around it. Some effects, such as the White Raven maneuver Douse the Flames, will effectively turn it off. Rendering them flat-footed will also prevent them from making opportunity attacks if they don't have Combat Reflexes. If you have total cover or total concealment from them, they won't be able to make attacks of opportunity against you. Disarming them of their weapon may prevent them from threatening squares. Reducing their size category, such as with reduce person, may also reduce their threatened area. If you can render them unable to attack at all, e.g. by paralyzing them, stunning them, dazing them, killing them, etc., that works too.

[heavyfuel]

A 374

You can also Tumble.

Because both ToB and Tumble use an absolute language, we have a contradiction, which can be solved by checking the Primary Source Errata.

When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. [...] 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.

As such, the disagreement between Tome of Battle and the PHB is solved, and you can Tumble to your heart's content

[Curmudgeon]

A 374 additional

You can also avoid Thicket of Blades AoOs with a successful Tumble check. (Note that the FAQ has one of its many errors here. Both Tumble skill and Thicket of Blades stance make absolute statements about ignoring/not ignoring movement-related AoOs. According to the Primary Sources Errata Rule, the rule in a primary sourcebook (Tumble skill description in Player's Handbook) wins this disagreement.)

Edit: slower than heavyfuel.

[Dmdork]

Q375 Can a barbed devil use improved grab and impale on the same attack? The same round?

[Andezzar]

A 375

Yes, if it wins the grapple check.

If it wins the grapple check, it establishes a hold and can impale the opponent on its barbed body.

[ShurikVch]

Q 376

Is it possible to use a "cat’s tail" (which you get at Stage 1 of Geomancer's Drift) to qualify for Prehensile Tail feat?

[Curmudgeon]

A 376 No.

Prehensile Tail doesn't require a tail, but rather a tail attack. You don't get that with Stage 1 Drift.

Stage 1 drifts have no game effect.

[ShurikVch]

Prehensile Tail doesn't require a tail, but rather a tail attack.

Wouldn't Unarmed Strike with a tail qualify?

EDIT: Alternately, Shock Wave feat allow you to attack with a tail (if you're Dragon type, Large+ size, and have PA)

[Jormengand]

A 376 Clarification The rider that stage 1 drifts have no game effect precludes you using them to have a game effect, even if you otherwise could.

Q 377 Is there any way of extending the function of a spell with a limited, but potentially arbitrary range (say I had enough CL to cast a spell with a range of five million miles) onto another plane? If it weren't quite as arbitrary, how much of the effect would make it onto the other plane?

[AmberVael]

A 377

One of the most direct ways is to use the metamagic feat Transdimensional Spell from Complete Arcane, which allows you to cast into coexistent planes (the Ethereal and Plane of Shadow).

If you desire to shoot into a non-coexistent plane, then distance alone cannot solve your problem. You would need a portal, such as one produced by the Gate spell, to reach another plane. Though if you have absurdly long spell ranges and know where a naturally occurring portal is (such as color pools in the Astral, or coterminous planar areas) then that might be a potential solution. Note that this half of the answer depends on default D&D cosmology and may not apply to all games.

[Zethex]

Q 378

Iceburn spell "Icicle": Does it trigger if I cast it directly above an enemy and it decides to move on its own turn?

Q 379

Blinded VS Uncanny Dodge: Is there any official statement or undeniable RAW rule that allows you to keep your Dex bonus to AC when blinded if you have Uncanny Dodge. The Blinded=Everyone else is invisible argument isn't enough on its own for our DM.

[qube]

A 379: By RAW, your DM is correct. If you're blinded, your opponent have total concealment; they don't count as invisible.

Blinded: The character cannot see. He takes a -2 penalty to Armor Class, loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), moves at half speed, and takes a -4 penalty on Search checks and on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Spot checks) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) to the blinded character. Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them.

In fact, by RAW, it's the opposite: blind trumps invisibility

Invisibility: Visually undetectable. An invisible creature gains a +2 bonus on attack rolls against sighted opponents, and ignores its opponents' Dexterity bonuses to AC (if any). (Invisibility has no effect against blinded or otherwise nonsighted creatures.) An invisible creature's location cannot be pinpointed by visual means, including darkvision. It has total concealment; even if an attacker correctly guesses the invisible creature's location, the attacker has a 50% miss chance in combat.

So,

• when blinded, and attacked by a visible attacker, you get -2 AC,
• when normal, but attacked by an invisible attacker, he gets +2 attack
• when blinded, and attacked by an invisible attacker, you get -2 AC, but he doesn't get +2 attack

By RAW, a blind barbarian attacked by invisible opponents would count as a blind barbarian attacked by opponents, not as a (normal) barbarian attacked by invisible opponents.



It seems the best you can do (other then accept yur DMs ruling - which is kinda rule 0, ya know), is point out that it says even

At 2nd level, a barbarian retains his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if he is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker.

Depending on how you read it 'even' might (though not neccecairly) mean there are other - unspecified - senarios where a barbarian retains his dex to AC ... but as this is unspecified it's no long the Rules As Written.


( no idea for Q 378 )

[Curmudgeon]

A 378

You must cast Icicle on an area of ceiling or doorframe. If the enemy below the Icicle walks into another space also overhung by Icicle (any other square in the 10'x10' area) then the spell triggers. If the next square the enemy moves into is not covered by Icicle, they haven't met the "walks beneath them" trigger for the spell. In D&D shifting of position within a square isn't considered movement; it becomes movement (walking) as soon as the creature enters another square. At that time they're walking and the spell would be adjudicated based on whether that new square was overhung by Icicle or not.

[AvatarVecna]

Q371 Rebuttal
Taking this into account...

The first doesn't seem to be saying that humans are actually Humanoids as in humanoid-type, and the latter doesn't say that they are Humanoids, only that they, half-humans, and humanlike races can be grouped together as Humanoids (Human).

...and knowing it refers to these...

A 371 Humanoid.

From page 27 of Player's Handbook:

A 371

Humans are humanoids with the human subtype. This isn't mentioned in their entry in the Races section of the Player's Handbook, but it's referenced indirectly in some other places, such as this section from a sidebar in Races of Destiny.



There are also other spots here and there that refer to "humans and other humanoids" or the like, and all NPC human statblocks are marked as humanoids.

...does this counter-argument have any weight to it? If so, is there any other proof that humans are Humanoid (Human)?

[Curmudgeon]

Re: Q 371 "Rebuttal"

What exactly is your "doesn't seem to be saying" issue? Humans are Humanoids; that's what "Centaur bards sometimes train the children of humans or other humanoids" says. There is no possible confusion, because Centaurs are not of Humanoid type; the only referent for "other humanoids" is "humans".

[Troacctid]

Re: 371 Rebuttal

"It says they're humanoids, but it doesn't say they're humanoids!" doesn't hold much water, no, for reasons that should hopefully be obvious.

You'd also need to address all the human statblocks that are listed as humanoid. In the absence of any text contradicting them, they are authoritative.

[Extra Anchovies]

Is there any other proof that humans are Humanoid (Human)?

The Tainted Raver template (Heroes of Horror, p. 154-155) does not change a creature's size/type entry. The "Sample Tainted Raver" section of the entry includes the line "This example uses a 5th-level human fighter as the base creature". In the sample Tainted Raver's statistics block, its size/type is given as "Medium Humanoid (Human)". This isn't necessarily the least obscure example of this sort of thing, but it's the first one that I found.

ETA: The "Ranger Favored Enemies" table on PHB p. 47 lists human as an example of a humanoid (human).

[Dmdork]

Q380 can true seeing see through obscuring mist?

[AvatarVecna]

A380

No, True Seeing does not see through Obscuring Mist; True Seeing specifically mentions not negating concealment (and even more specifically mentions that concealment caused by "fog and the like".

[justiceforall]

Q381

Can the Energize Armor feat be used prior to being struck with an energy based attack, or does the wording force it to only be used as an immediate action in response to said attack?

Ie: can you activate it then leave it running so to speak in a similar way to the Invest Armor feat?

[AmberVael]

A 381

You must use it as a reaction due to its wording. It doesn't allow you to choose to activate it earlier and leave it running- it must be used as "an immediate action in reaction to being affected by an [effect]."

[Khedrac]

Wouldn't Unarmed Strike with a tail qualify?

A376 B No, because unarmed strike with a tail is not a tail attack.
Unarmed strikes are in effect floating attacks which use whichever body part is handy, thus you don't have a "tail attack" - you have the potential to make a "tail attack".

[Herbert West]

Q382 When using the Clever Opportunist feat (DotU 47) to trade places with an AoO triggerer, does switching places trigger more attacks of opportunities on you or your attacker, and if so, who gets to take them? Just you and the AoO triggerer, or adjacent creatures?

[Curmudgeon]

A 382

No, there are no movement-provoked AoOs from Clever Opportunist. The feat doesn't specify any particulars about the movement except that the end positions must be legal for both characters; Clever Opportunist merely has you immediately switch places. An enemy can't take an AoO for movement unless they perceive you attempting to leave a square they threaten. If you immediately switch places (with no other specification) there's no perception of provoking movement.