Simple Q&A (By RAW) III

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 341

To use least augment crystals the item has to be at least masterwork.

Warforged are neither masterwork nor armor/items, so they cannot be use them according to a strict reading of the RAW.

However, since warforged can be enchanted as armor there is no reason not to allow it and it could be RAI too if the question make it to the official FAQ.
(Not all crystals make sense to use though)

[Asmodeus]

A. 341

To use least augment crystals the item has to be at least masterwork.

Warforged are neither masterwork nor armor/items, so they cannot be use them according to a strict reading of the RAW.

However, since warforged can be enchanted as armor there is no reason not to allow it and it could be RAI too if the question make it to the official FAQ.
(Not all crystals make sense to use though)

Q 341 b?

What about making one into a warforged attached/embedded component?

Edit: In answer to my own question, the Eberron Campaign setting specifically states that theoretically, any magic item can be crafted as a warforged component.

From my limited understanding of these crystals, what you would want to do is create a magic weapon with a crystal, and then use it as a warforged component.

I'm not as familiar with the crystals as I am with warforged though, so take my input with a grain of salt.

[Matthew]

Q 342

Can a Fighter 1 acquire the Martial Study and Martial Stance Feats from Tome of Battle? Does he need to be of a certain level to gain access or does he simply need to fulfil the prerequisites?

So, for instance, could a Human Fighter 1 acquire Blistering Flourish, Fire Riposte and Dragon's Flame simply by virtue of meeting the prerequisites and ignore the usual level requirements?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 341 b

That would solve the problem entirely.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 342

No, you still need to have a high enough initiator level to gain access to the maneuvers (page 39 TOB).

[Matthew]

Q 342 continued...

a) Yeah, I checked there before posing this question, but the Feat doesn't seem to be the same as the normal process. All of the guidance on page 39 seems to assume you are gaining a Manoeuvre by way of a new Level and Initiator Level is apparently not the same as Prerequisite, which is all the Feat appears to require. [See page 31 for the Feat entry and page 44 for the difference between Prerequisite and Initiator Level, as well as the phrase "You can learn any Manoeuvre you like by choosing the Martial Study Feat. However, you still must meet the prerequisite of the Maneouvre."].

b) Is the a Fighter 1's Initiator Level 0, 1/2 or 1? I would have thought 0, but I cannot find anything explicit.

c) What I am particularly looking for is the line that reads "You must have an Initiator Level of X to Initiate a Maneouvre of Level Y." The only thing I can find is the reference in Chapter One to Initiator Levels being functionally the same as Caster or Manifester Levels.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 342 Continued...

Ad a) The feat is a special way of gaining access to manoeuvres, so the language is of course geared towards describing the norm rather than the special case, although references are also made to the feat some places.

On page 44 the prerequisite part of the manoeuvre entry is described. It states that

In addition to meeting the class and level requirement before you can learn a maneuver, ...

So not only do you need to fulfil the requirements described under each manoeuvre, you also need to meet the initiator level requirement.

Page 39 under Selecting Martial Maneuvers it further says:

Your level in a martial adept class determines the highest-level maneuvers you can learn.

Page 39 under Initiator Level the intent is further described: Balance.

Ad b) 0. Unless otherwise specified it follows the normal rules for rounding in D&D.

Ad c) I think page 39 and 44 are reasonably clear although not spelling it out explicitly like you would like it.

Please let me know if you are not convinced.

[Alveanerle]

Q. 343
Can one make an attack of opportunity against character outside his threat range that has better threat range and provoked the attack with his action?

To be more specific: Abel is a human mook with threat range 5ft. Balabar is an ogre destroyer with a natural threat range of 10ft. Balabar does not posess the "improved grapple" feat. Standing 10ft away, Balabar tries to enter the grapple with Abel. Can Abel make an attack of opportunity against Balabar's unarmed hand that he tries to initiate grapple with?

[Fax Celestis]

A343 Most special actions--like grapple, bull rush, and overrun--that provoke attacks of opportunity require you to enter your opponent's square as part of the action. This is the part of the action that provokes an AoO, so you would be within the threat range regardless.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 343 Correction

I am afraid that is not entirely correct Fax.

You cannot make an AoO against your opponent unless you threaten said opponent.

Moving is only done to maintain the grapple for later rounds and does not provoke an AoO from the one you are grappling.

Step 4: Maintain Grapple. To maintain the grapple for later rounds, you must move into the target’s space. (This movement is free and doesn’t count as part of your movement in the round.) Moving, as normal, provokes attacks of opportunity from threatening opponents, but not from your target.

(My emphasis)

[Fax Celestis]

...ah, so not with grapple then. But what I said would apply to Bull Rush and Overrun since they DO require you to move through your opponents square.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

...ah, so not with grapple then. But what I said would apply to Bull Rush and Overrun since they DO require you to move through your opponents square.

Most certainly.

[Matthew]

Q. 342 Continued...

On page 44 the prerequisite part of the manoeuvre entry is described. It states that

So not only do you need to fulfil the requirements described under each manoeuvre, you also need to meet the initiator level requirement.

Ahah! That's what I was missing, the slight difference between prerequisites and requirements!

Ad b) 0. Unless otherwise specified it follows the normal rules for rounding in D&D.

Yeah, thought so.

Ad c) I think page 39 and 44 are reasonably clear although not spelling it out explicitly like you would like it.

Typically vague, I would say, but I think enough evidence can be gathered to make a good case for it operating the way you describe.

Please let me know if you are not convinced.

Heh, I was always convinced of the intent, just not the RAW.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Q. 342 Continued...
Heh, I was always convinced of the intent, just not the RAW.

I though so, but I just wanted to state it anyway in case anyone else was wondering.

I was mostly wondered if the RAW arguments were convincing.

[ArmorArmadillo]

Q. 343

Combat Expertise [General]
Prerequisite

Int 13.
Benefit: When you use the attack action or the full attack action in melee, you can take a penalty of as much as -5 on your attack roll and add the same number (+5 or less) as a dodge bonus to your Armor Class. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The changes to attack rolls and Armor Class last until your next action.

Normal: A character without the Combat Expertise feat can fight defensively while using the attack or full attack action to take a -4 penalty on attack rolls and gain a +2 dodge bonus to Armor Class.

Special: A fighter may select Combat Expertise as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Emphasis mine; how does use of combat expertise interact with feats (such as two-weapon defense) which work differently while fighting defensively?

[Fax Celestis]

A344 (NOT 343) Taking a -2 penalty via Combat Expertise is considered "fighting defensively" in almost every case I can think of.

[Mael]

A. 344

Combat expertise is distinct from fighting defensivly, and can stack with fighting defensivly (ref: PHP page 140). Feats such as 'two weapon defense' which refer specifically to fighting defensively have no effect combat expertise.

[nerulean]

Q345

In what order do actions resolve for mounted characters? Can they act interchangeably, provided one finishes an action before the next takes one? If the mount has an ability that allows it to charge, attack and then move again, can the rider make an attack at the same time as the mount against the same opponent?

[Roland St. Jude]

Q346

Can a creature under the effect of Gaseous Form be the target of a Cure Light Wounds spell?

[Zherog]

A346

I don't see anything in the description of gaseous form that would make the subject immune to being touched to deliver a healing spell. I mean it does say the subject becomes "insubstantial," but that's not a game term.

So I see no reason why it wouldn't work.

[Mael]

A. 346

Yes. Gaseous Form puts quite a few restrictions on actions you can take, but doesn't limit actions that can be taken agains you. You still have a physical form which can be attacked (otherwise why would you explicitly gain damage reduction?), and so you can still be the target of spells (whether that's cure light wounds or fireball).

Edit: and that's what happens when I go looking for the book before posting :)

[Lemur]

Q 347

Does the extra weapon damage from a critical hit count towards the weapon's "base damage"? For example, a character with a claw attack dealing 1d6 damage using Claws of the Vampire scores a critical hit. Does the extra 1d6 from the critical hit add to the healing gained?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 345

The mount does the movement for the character and in many respects they both share many of the benefits of feats and effect, so as long as you are normally capable of making an attack at the end of a charge you should be able to attack the opponent your mount is charging.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 347

Critical hits are not additional damage as "defined" by the power.

(additional damage dealt because of a high Strength score or other enhancements does not count toward the amount you heal)

It is simply your base damage multiplied if you will, so i would have to say that this points towards a yes to your question.

[Winged One]

Q 348

Can a Dedicated Wright Homunculus keep working on a magical item if it's master it more than 1,500 feet away from it?

Q 349

Does an artificer's ability to creat a Homunculus allow him or her to make one of the types of Homunculi listed in the Eberron Campaign Setting?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 348

Yes, it is different from the other Homunculi is this respect.

A. 349

Yes.

[Mephibosheth]

Q350
The Shivering Touch spell from Frostburn deals Dex damage on a successful melee touch attack and has a duration of 1 round/level. Does this mean that one could cast this spell and make shivering touch attacks for 1 round/level, or that the damage lasts for 1 round/level?

[Zherog]

A 350

Ability damage, just like hit point damage, persists until it is healed. The duration refers to how long you have the ability to freeze people with a mere touch. For a similar spell in the SRD, take a peek at bolts of bedevilment or call lightning.

edit: for further reading, here's "Ability Damage" from the SRD:

Ability Damage: This attack damages an opponent’s ability score. The creature’s descriptive text gives the ability and the amount of damage. If an attack that causes ability damage scores a critical hit, it deals twice the indicated amount of damage (if the damage is expressed as a die range, roll two dice). Ability damage returns at the rate of 1 point per day (or double that if the character gets complete bed rest) for each affected ability, and the spells lesser restoration and restoration offset ability damage as well.

[curtmack]

Q351

Monks don't get many of their bonuses and abilities when wearing armor. Does this include, for example, bracers of armor?

[Fax Celestis]

A351 No. It's not about receiving an armor bonus to AC; it's about the constraints of armor interfering with their abilities. Only actual armor--and shields--interferes.