Simple Q&A (By RAW) III

[yango]

Q578

For the Combat Awareness and Combat Defense feats, do you gain the "If you have three or more combat form feats..." benefits permanently, or only during combat focus?

[Thurbane]

Q 579

Blur, Displacement and Mirror Image - how do these three interact? If a creature has Blur and Displacement active, do both miss chances (20% and 50%) apply, or only the greater? Also, if a creature has a Mirror Image spell active, do the generated images enjoy the miss chance from a Blur and/or Displacement?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 579

Both Blur and Displacement provide concealment and

Multiple concealment conditions do not stack.

So you only have a 50 % miss chance.


Mirror images share purely visual effects, so the images would also benefit from any concealment the caster may have.

If the user has concealment from her surroundings, the images have the same concealment. The images also look just like the caster, and they share purely visual effects such as the blur or displacement spell. If the mirror image user is also using either of these effects, an attack aimed at an image has the same miss chance an attack aimed at the caster has.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 577

Q 577

Is the 6ft. range of the Shadow Noose maneuver correct, and if so, how is it measured?

I don't think we have the same edition of TOB if yours truly say 6 feet.

Mine says 60 feet.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 578

Q578

For the Combat Awareness and Combat Defense feats, do you gain the "If you have three or more combat form feats..." benefits permanently, or only during combat focus?

During combat focus. The introduction says that you need to be in combat focus to benefit from your combat focus feats.

[Skjaldbakka]

Q 579

What are the LA's for the Half-Golem Templates in MMII?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 579

They have not been given a LA and are thus not considered suitable as PCs.

Update information about MM II and other 3.0 books can be found here.

A web-enhancement for MM II was released containing more Half-Golems. These were suggested as characters and the LA could probably be set equal to the CR adjustment.

[AlterForm]

Q580 Heavy Fortification isn't restricted to heavy armor, is it?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 580

No, there are no restrictions on type of armor or shield.

[Curmudgeon]

A 579 Correction

Both Blur and Displacement provide concealment and

Displacement does not provide concealment:

Displacement
Illusion (Glamer)

The subject of this spell appears to be about 2 feet away from its true location. The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment. However, unlike actual total concealment, displacement does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally. True seeing reveals its true location.

With Displacement you're not concealed in any way; you're 100% visible. The miss chance is similar to that of Mirror Image, because the enemy has a 50% chance of attacking the wrong location.

Displacement's miss chance will stack with that from Blur. It will also stack with Mirror Image's miss chance, because the extra images from that spell are "each within 5 feet of at least one other figment or you", meaning in different squares, and the 2' displacement of Displacement would leave that in the same square as the intended target. Thus the enemy could target you or one of the figments, chosen randomly, and if they chance to "target" you could miss because they're really 2' off their aim point.


A 580 Additional information

Heavy Fortification may be obtained with no armor and no shield via a Gemstone of Fortification (Draconomicon, page 83). This is quite handy for Monks.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 579 Corrected Correction

A 579 Correction
Displacement does not provide concealment: With Displacement you're not concealed in any way; you're 100% visible.

Your location is "concealed" by the displacement, but you can still be targeted since you are not invisible.

The miss chance from displacement is a concealment effect.

The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment.

Even if this was not the case you would still be able to target the correct square, which again limits the miss chance to 50 %.

[Awetugiw]

Q579BHow about an invisible, blinking target? 50% or 75% miss chance?

[martyboy74]

A579B: It'd be two 50% miss chance rolls. Statistically, this is 75%, but it is not rolled that way.

[Citizen Joe]

A579 Actually its a little weird.

Blinking gives 50% miss chance partly because you're ethereal and partly because you are invisible. If they can hit ethereal then the miss chance drops to 20%. That means blink grants partial concealment. If they can SEE invisible, then the miss chance drops to 20%.

Invisibility grants total concealment for 50% miss chance. So if you could hit ethereal, then the miss chance would still be 50% from total concealment.

There are two ways of adjudicating this.
1) the combined etherealness and hiddeness of blink grants you total concealment, where one or the other only grants partial concealment. In this case, blink and invisibility do the same thing: grant total concealment for 50% miss chance. (Statistically 50% miss)
2) Check first to see if you miss due to total concealment (50%). Then if you did hit the right place, check to see if ethereal (20%). (Statistically 60% miss)

[Curmudgeon]

A 579 Negation of the Erroneous Corrected Correction

Your location is "concealed" by the displacement, but you can still be targeted since you are not invisible.

The miss chance from displacement is a concealment effect.

From the online D&D Glossary:

concealment

Something that prevents an attacker from clearly seeing his or her target. Concealment creates a chance that an otherwise successful attack misses (a miss chance).

Displacement does not in any way alter the clarity of the target's image; it merely moves it 2' away. Your "location is concealed" circumlocution doesn't fit the D&D definition of concealment.

Total Concealment

If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can’t attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).

Displacement
Illusion (Glamer)

The subject of this spell appears to be about 2 feet away from its true location. The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment. However, unlike actual total concealment, displacement does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally. True seeing reveals its true location.

You can target an enemy under a Displacement spell normally. You cannot do the same to a target with total concealment. "As if it had total concealment" means that it doesn't have total concealment -- or any degree of concealment. This line in the spell description merely equates the miss chance to a known quantity, that of total concealment.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 579 Negation of the Erroneous Negation of the Correct Corrected Correction

Displacement does not in any way alter the clarity of the target's image; it merely moves it 2' away. Your "location is concealed" circumlocution doesn't fit the D&D definition of concealment.

We are not talking about whether the image of the target is concealed. The true location of the target is not where the spell makes it seem to be.
Sounds to me like that fits the glossary definition nicely.

You can target an enemy under a Displacement spell normally. You cannot do the same to a target with total concealment.

Correct.

"As if it had total concealment" means that it doesn't have total concealment -- or any degree of concealment.

It means that while the concealment granted by Displacement is the same as that of total concealment, you do not gain all the properties of actually being totally concealed.

This line in the spell description merely equates the miss chance to a known quantity, that of total concealment.

There is no point in referencing concealment if that was a totally irrelevant condition.

[Curmudgeon]

A 579 Negation of the Exercise in Sophistry Attempting to Negate the Negation of the Erroneous Corrected Correction

We are not talking about whether the image of the target is concealed.

We must talk about whether the target's image is visible, as that's the definition of the term:

concealment

Something that prevents an attacker from clearly seeing his or her target.

The true location of the target is not where the spell makes it seem to be.
Sounds to me like that fits the glossary definition nicely.

Concealment requires that the target not be clearly seen, which Displacement does not accomplish. The location of the target is not a factor in concealment, only its visibility. There is absolutely no stipulation about the target's location in the glossary definition, and your attempt to concoct one is mere sophistry. Mirror Image creates a bunch of displaced images that are all clearly visible, too. It also does not create concealment.

There is no point in referencing concealment if that was a totally irrelevant condition.

The relevance of the comment is to point out that Displacement doesn't provide concealment, just the same miss chance. Of course the phrasing could have been better, as you've completely missed that point.

[martyboy74]

Just start a thread about question 579 please. It's getting out of hand.

[Saph]

Q. 581

Empower Spell says that it increases by one-half all 'variable, numeric effects' of the spell in question. Does this also apply to bonuses from level?

For example, Ray of Enfeeblement inflicts a penalty of 1d6 strength +1 per two caster levels. So would an Empowered Ray of Enfeeblement, cast at level 10, inflict a penalty of (1d6+5)x1.5, or (1d6x1.5)+5?

- Saph

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 581

Any numeric result of a spell that includes a random variable (dice roll) are affected by Empower.

Parts of the spell that has no random variable part is not affected nor are associated rolls like saving throws and caster level checks etc.

CL 10: (1d6+5)x1.5

[Citizen Joe]

A 581 Counter opinion

To answer this we must ask two questions:
1) What is a non-variable numeric effect?
Protection from evil grants +2 Deflection bonus to AC, and is not affected by level. As opposed to barkskin which grants more AC bonus based on level, thus variable, not random, not static. Level changing effect do count.

2) What is a variable non-numeric effect?
The form taken by a polymorph other is a non-numeric effect. Immunity to poison is a non-numeric effect.


Thus, I conclude that you calculate numeric effects as normal then add 50%

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A 581 Counter opinion

To answer this we must ask two questions:
1) What is a non-variable numeric effect?
Protection from evil grants +2 Deflection bonus to AC, and is not affected by level. As opposed to barkskin which grants more AC bonus based on level, thus variable, not random, not static. Level changing effect do count.

Thus, I conclude that you calculate numeric effects as normal then add 50%

Considering that spells without random variables are not affected I think it is reasonably clear what they mean by variable.

Variable refers to variable effects for the casting of the spell, not how the spell changes as the caster becomes more experienced.

[Citizen Joe]

Considering that spells without random variables are not affected I think it is reasonably clear what they mean by variable.

Request citation to prove non-random variable spells are not affected. Or even a definition of variable. I am admittedly using the computer programming and algebraic definition of 'variable'. I've been doing a search on the SRD to find a definition of variable with little luck.

[Jasdoif]

Only variable parts of the spell are affected. Straight per level bonuses are fixed so they would not be increased by Empower.

CL 10: 1d6x1.5 + 5

I'm afraid the PHB disagrees with you.

For example, an empowered magic missile deals 1-1/2 times its normal damage (roll 1d4+1 and multiply the result by 1-1/2 for each missile).

Request citation to prove non-random variable spells are not affected.

Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 579 Negation of the Allegation of Sophistry

We must talk about whether the target's image is visible, as that's the definition of the term:

That is certainly not the definition!
How can you claim that if you are looking at a displaced image of your target you are clearly seeing the target?

If I am unable to see someone clearly in the light of a candle then I am certainly even less capable of seeing my target clearly if a spell has changed its sensory qualities so that it appears to be 2 feet away from its true location.

Concealment requires that the target not be clearly seen, which Displacement does not accomplish. The location of the target is not a factor in concealment, only its visibility. There is absolutely no stipulation about the target's location in the glossary definition, and your attempt to concoct one is mere sophistry.

You are not seeing your target clearly if you are unable to locate it with more than a 2 feet margin of error. That is why location doe matter. I have used nothing but the glossary definition in showing you that the target is not clearly seen by looking at a displaced image of said target.

If you look at a painting or even a photo you are not clearly seeing the subject either. You are looking at something that may be an exact duplicate, but the real creature remains concealed.

Mirror Image creates a bunch of displaced images that are all clearly visible, too. It also does not create concealment.

No, but you are still fully visible among those images, just indistinguishable from them.


The relevance of the comment is to point out that Displacement doesn't provide concealment, just the same miss chance. Of course the phrasing could have been better, as you've completely missed that point.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Citizen Joe: X/level is of course a variable, but it is fixed when you are casting the spell, so it is really matter of time horizon when approaching the problem.
I apologize for not providing the reference in the first place.

I'm afraid the PHB disagrees with you.

I stand corrected. It would seem that as long as any part of the calculation includes a random variable even the non-random parts are multiplied. It is certainly easier that way.

[Citizen Joe]

Q 582

Going back through the existing sourcebooks, have any been published without definition problems and clarity issues?

[Jasdoif]

For the record, I prefer that empower only increases dice, as it prevents "single die but plenty of bonus for caster level" effects from getting out of hand. However, since this thread is for answers by RAW....

A581 with correction, restated for clarity

As long as the spell effect involves dice, it's increased by 50% when empowered. This includes any linear bonuses from caster level, or any other source.

[Dhavaer]

Q 583

When you cut your way out of a monster with the Swallow Whole ability, is the damage done to the monster's stomach deducted from its hit points?

[Shhalahr Windrider]

A 583

No. Individual descriptions of Swallow Whole seem to indicate the damage is done directly to the stomach or gizzard. And, of course, those organs instantaneously heal after the swallowed creature is free.