New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 10 of 50 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718192035 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 300 of 1497
  1. - Top - End - #271
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Thurbane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Male

    Question Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 165

    If a troll was to use a half-eaten horse carcass as an improvised thrown weapon, what kind of damage would it do, would it be a two-handed weapon for Str bonus damage, what would its range increment be (10ft?), and what would the to hit penalty for being an improvised weapon be (I'm assuming -4?).

    If a full horse carcass is too large to be used in this manner, assume enough has been eaten to be of appropriate size.

  2. - Top - End - #272
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 166

    What are the Forgotten Realms Deities that are most similar to

    a) Boccob?

    b) Wee Jas?

    Q 167

    Are there any published adventures that involve plane hopping and/or Sigil?
    Last edited by Andezzar; 2016-09-27 at 04:51 AM.

  3. - Top - End - #273
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    NinjaGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by Dmdork View Post
    Q164. can I cast wall of smoke right on the enemies, forcing the fort save?
    A 164
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD, Wall of Iron
    The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or another object.
    Wall of Iron has this caveat which wall of smoke does not, so you should be good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thurbane View Post
    Q 165

    If a troll was to use a half-eaten horse carcass as an improvised thrown weapon, what kind of damage would it do, would it be a two-handed weapon for Str bonus damage, what would its range increment be (10ft?), and what would the to hit penalty for being an improvised weapon be (I'm assuming -4?).

    If a full horse carcass is too large to be used in this manner, assume enough has been eaten to be of appropriate size.
    A 165
    Complete Warrior page 159
    A horse weighs roughly 1,100 lbs so it'll do 9d6 damage, half a horse would do 5d6 damage. Unless you consider horses soft/malleable, then it would be 6d6 and 4d6 nonlethal. -4 on the attack with improvised weapon. 10 foot range increment. Thrown weapons add normal STR modifier to damage. Though by the exact rules a troll might not be big enough to throw a horse at all.

  4. - Top - End - #274
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    A 164 Correction
    Quote Originally Posted by NinjaTBB View Post
    A 164

    Wall of Iron has this caveat which wall of smoke does not, so you should be good.
    This caveat is unnecessary. it is generally not possible
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it.

  5. - Top - End - #275
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    NinjaGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by Andezzar View Post
    A 164 Correction

    This caveat is unnecessary. it is generally not possible
    It's not creating anything inside a creature. Just around it so it's subject to its effects. A la cloudkill.

  6. - Top - End - #276
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by NinjaTBB View Post
    It's not creating anything inside a creature. Just around it so it's subject to its effects. A la cloudkill.
    It actually is, if you want it to affect creatures directly after the casting. The area can only be created along the lines of the squares or diagonally going through squares. If it is along a line, it does not interact with creatures on wither side. If it goes through a square there is no rule saying that it is not within the creature.

    No, you cannot drop cloudkill on creatures for the exact same reason. Cloudkill through fog cloud works differently. You only designate a point where the effect is created and then billows out to fill an area. Wall of smoke is wholly created along a line and thus it cannot be created inside a creature.
    Last edited by Andezzar; 2016-09-27 at 07:27 AM.

  7. - Top - End - #277
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lincoln, RI
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    A167 Yes. Expedition to the Demonweb Pits has a description of Sigil and, I believe, involves more than a single plane as well.
    Last edited by nyjastul69; 2016-09-27 at 07:26 AM.

  8. - Top - End - #278
    Troll in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    A 166 a Probably Mystra as goddess of magic (as Boccob is the Archmage of the gods).

  9. - Top - End - #279
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    NinjaGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by Andezzar View Post
    It actually is, if you want it to affect creatures directly after the casting.
    On your turn, immediately after, yes. You'd have to fill their lungs with it. But that's not what the original question was. The original question just wanted to force them to make the save, which would happen if they were within it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Andezzar View Post
    The area can only be created along the lines of the squares or diagonally going through squares. If it is along a line, it does not interact with creatures on wither side. If it goes through a square there is no rule saying that it is not within the creature.

    No, you cannot drop cloudkill on creatures for the exact same reason. Cloudkill through fog cloud works differently. You only designate a point where the effect is created and then billows out to fill an area. Wall of smoke is wholly created along a line and thus it cannot be created inside a creature.
    Fair point on the cloudkill spread, I cede there. I think our disagreement hinges on differing interpretations of the limitations described by conjuration spells.
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it.
    What I perceive your interpretation to be: Conjuration spells cannot make things inside other things so any orientation which would require that is not allowed.
    My interpretation: Conjuration spells are not powerful enough to make things inside of other things, so they simply do not when it applies.

    Here's my evidence to back my thinking:

    Sleet storm has an area (more accurately a volume) 40 feet in radius and 20 feet high. By your interpretation this spell cannot work if a creature is within the volume described when it is cast. As a battlefield control spell that seems quite hindering that it would require you to cast on an empty area and hope that the enemy wanders into it. Furthermore, if your DM felt like being a hard-ass (or even just realistic) this spell would fail most of the time due to bugs/birds/whatever else being in the volume when it's cast.
    Under my interpretation, the spell simply doesn't create sleet in places where creatures are, so all those bugs/birds/enemies within it are still affected without having any sleet conjured within them.

    Grease, the spell specifically calls out that it can be cast on the same squares that creatures are currently in.
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    Any creature in the area when the spell is cast must make a successful Reflex save or fall.
    So clearly to some degree conjuration spells can occupy the same area as creatures.

    Wall of stone and wall of iron, as I already mentioned, they specifically call out that they cannot be made in the same space as a creature. Why would they say that if the general rule already said the same thing? Because the general rule doesn't say that. The general rule only says things can't be conjured within creatures, conjuring without (is that a valid use of the word?) creatures is still fair game. So these two spells have additional restrictions to prevent them from being used to trap creatures within.

    Furthermore, the component of the rule requiring conjurations to not float implies that you can only cast wall spells on flat ground. If the ground is uneven, you will have portions floating, which is against the rules. So just lower the wall until there are no floating parts, but then there will inevitably be some parts sticking into the ground, which by your interpretation means the spell cannot work there. Under my interpretation the spell still works, there's just no wall created under/in the ground.

    All that so say, the way I believe the rule to be written, says the wall of smoke can indeed be cast where a creature currently is. There will simply be no smoke in the space occupied by the creature. The creature will then take damage as normal on it's turn for moving through the wall.
    Last edited by NinjaTBB; 2016-09-27 at 03:12 PM.

  10. - Top - End - #280
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by NinjaTBB View Post
    What I perceive your interpretation to be: Conjuration spells cannot make things inside other things so any orientation which would require that is not allowed.
    My interpretation: Conjuration spells are not powerful enough to make things inside of other things, so they simply do not when it applies.
    The problem with your interpretation is that there is no general rule that conjuration spells can crate their effect only partially.

    Here's my evidence to back my thinking:

    Quote Originally Posted by NinjaTBB View Post
    Sleet storm has an area (more accurately a volume) 40 feet in radius and 20 feet high. By your interpretation this spell cannot work if a creature is within the volume described when it is cast. As a battlefield control spell that seems quite hindering that it would require you to cast on an empty area and hope that the enemy wanders into it. Furthermore, if your DM felt like being a hard-ass (or even just realistic) this spell would fail most of the time due to bugs/birds/whatever else being in the volume when it's cast.
    Sleet storm has a line that allows the aforementioned partial creation:
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    A creature can walk within or through the area of sleet at half normal speed with a DC 10 Balance check.
    A creature cannot walk within the area unless it is already in it.

    Quote Originally Posted by NinjaTBB View Post
    Grease, the spell specifically calls out that it can be cast on the same squares that creatures are currently in. So clearly to some degree conjuration spells can occupy the same area as creatures.
    Exactly. That is an explicit exception.

    Quote Originally Posted by NinjaTBB View Post
    Wall of stone and wall of iron, as I already mentioned, they specifically call out that they cannot be made in the same space as a creature. Why would they say that if the general rule already said the same thing? Because the general rule doesn't say that. The general rule only says things can't be conjured within creatures, conjuring without (is that a valid use of the word?) creatures is still fair game. So these two spells have additional restrictions to prevent them from being used to trap creatures within.
    That wouldn't be the first time that the books reiterate rules that are already established.

    Quote Originally Posted by NinjaTBB View Post
    Furthermore, the component of the rule requiring conjurations to not float implies that you can only cast wall spells on flat ground. If the ground is uneven, you will have portions floating, which is against the rules. So just lower the wall until there are no floating parts, but then there will inevitably be some parts sticking into the ground, which by your interpretation means the spell cannot work there. Under my interpretation the spell still works, there's just no wall created under/in the ground.
    That is an interesting point if you want to make the rules playable, but we are talking about the rules as written. As written you cannot partially create an effect and the effect cannot be created within a creature. That means the spell must fail.
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform, the casting fails and the spell is wasted.

  11. - Top - End - #281
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    NinjaGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by Andezzar View Post
    That is an interesting point if you want to make the rules playable, but we are talking about the rules as written. As written you cannot partially create an effect and the effect cannot be created within a creature. That means the spell must fail.
    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    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.
    Spells can absolutely have partial effect area. Just like the range descriptor says "you cannot have the spell effect any farther away than x" the conjuration descriptor says "you cannot have the spell effect inside a creature or object" it still works, but the area that would have been within the creature is wasted.

  12. - Top - End - #282
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lincoln, RI
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by NinjaTBB View Post
    Spells can absolutely have partial effect area. Just like the range descriptor says "you cannot have the spell effect any farther away than x" the conjuration descriptor says "you cannot have the spell effect inside a creature or object" it still works, but the area that would have been within the creature is wasted.
    This is not a discussion thread. Please create a unique thread to argue RAW v RAI or RAW v RAW. This argument is clogging up the thread.
    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.- Benjamin Franklin


    I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. -Evelyn Beatrice Hall

  13. - Top - End - #283
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Tula, Russia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 168

    Power Armor from Return to the Temple of the Frog have 0 ACP, 0% ASF, don't count as armor for Armor Proficiency feats, and weighs 4 lbs. (less than most clothing)
    Is it right to presume Monk can wear it, and still use all class features?

    Q 169

    Urban Companion:
    This is identical to the sorcerer's ability to summon a familiar (PH 52), including all benefits granted and gained by the familiar, except as noted below. Her functional level for determining the abilities of the companion is equal to her druid level or one-half her ranger level.
    • She does not lose experience points if her urban companion is slain, and she requires only 24 hours to replace one who is lost.
    • Her urban companion has total hit points equal to 3/4 her own hit points, rather than half as per a familiar.
    •The urban companion gains the ability to speak with other animals of its kind when she has an effective master level of 1st, rather than 7th.
    •When she reaches an effective master level of 7th, she can speak with animals of her companion's kind, as per speak with animals. This is a supernatural ability that functions constantly, and it requires only a free action to reactivate if somehow dispelled.
    Does it mean Urban Companion can benefit from any and all things which are usually affect the Familiar?
    If yes, then how about the feats such as Improved/Celestial/Dragon/Darkness Familiar?

  14. - Top - End - #284
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 168

    Nope. It only does not count as armor for proficiencies, nothing more nothing less. It is still called armor, it occupies the armor slot, it gives an armor bonus.

  15. - Top - End - #285
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q170

    Is there a way to increase the range of the Runehound's Vile Spew ability?

  16. - Top - End - #286
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 171

    Can I use Dweomer Vortex's swift action ability to dispel the following?
    a) A 9th level spell
    b) 2 4th level spells on the same target/area

    Q 172

    If dweomer vortex automatically absorbs spells in the following order, does the last spell still get absorbed?
    1st 1st 1st 1st 1st 3rd
    Last edited by kkplx; 2016-09-29 at 12:59 PM.

  17. - Top - End - #287
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    The Viscount's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2012

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 173

    Are class features considered Special Qualities or Special Attacks? If it's not all one or the other is there a general rule for deciding what is what?
    Kolyarut Avatar by Potatocubed.
    Quote Originally Posted by willpell View Post
    Only playing Tier 1s is like only eating in five-star restaurants [...] sometimes I just want a cheeseburger and some frogurt. Why limit yourself?
    Awards

  18. - Top - End - #288
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Debatra's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Kaeda
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 174

    Assuming a caster level of 20, what first-level spell gives the largest bonus (of any type) to AC?
    Kaedanis Pyran, tai faernae.

    The LA Assignment Threads: Attempting to Make Monsters Playable Since 2016

    My Homebrewer's Extended Signature
    Spoiler: Quotes
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Roland just endorsed a crack pairing?


    Did... did we break the universe?
    Quote Originally Posted by SassyQuatch View Post
    It is a major flaw in the game. Destroy a moon? Sure. Talk to somebody a hundred miles away, that's going to be difficult.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rizban View Post
    Realistically speaking... D&D style magic doesn't exist, so... let's ignore reality.

  19. - Top - End - #289
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ClericGirl

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Clockwork Nirvana
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by The Viscount View Post
    Q 173

    Are class features considered Special Qualities or Special Attacks? If it's not all one or the other is there a general rule for deciding what is what?
    A173If it is a "mode of attack" then it would be a special attack. Otherwise, it would be a special quality.
    Last edited by Hecuba; 2016-10-02 at 11:02 AM.

  20. - Top - End - #290
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Thurbane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 175

    What happens if you use Iaijutsu Focus with a weapon that deals nonlethal damage, such as a sap? Is the additional damage from the skill lethal or nonlethal? Can you even use the skill with a nonlethal weapon?

  21. - Top - End - #291
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Jowgen's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2013

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 176

    If a spell trigger/completion item is crafted on a plane that has an Enhanced Magic trait pertaining to the contained spell (e.g. Wand of Fireball on the Plane of Fire), how are the item and its creation cost affected?
    Quote Originally Posted by afroakuma View Post
    Ugh. For the record, I hate you. I hate you very much.
    The Voidstone Arsenal

    The Redeemery

    Feat-buying resource

    Magical Plants and Where to Find Them

    Floating Disk Utility

    Taking 10 resource

  22. - Top - End - #292
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ClericGirl

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Clockwork Nirvana
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    A 176: The enhanced magic traits allow you to cast the relevant spells as though you had the relevant metamagic feats but without using the higher level slots or longer cast time. You add MM to an item by including the feats on the spell you expend during crafting. Thus, using your Fireball example, it would be an item of Maximized, enlarged Fireball.

    The cost should follow the normal formula, with the level of spell and level of caster variables matching those you used when crafting the spell. (There is a good case to be made however, that this'd is one of the cases where market price should vary from base price- they are only equal for "many items").


    Withdrawn - see responses below.
    Last edited by Hecuba; 2016-10-03 at 08:34 AM.

  23. - Top - End - #293
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Troacctid's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    California
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by ShurikVch View Post
    Q 169

    Urban Companion:Does it mean Urban Companion can benefit from any and all things which are usually affect the Familiar?
    If yes, then how about the feats such as Improved/Celestial/Dragon/Darkness Familiar?
    Some things but not others. For example, Improved Familiar still requires an arcane spellcaster level, which, as a druid, you probably do not have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jowgen View Post
    Q 176

    If a spell trigger/completion item is crafted on a plane that has an Enhanced Magic trait pertaining to the contained spell (e.g. Wand of Fireball on the Plane of Fire), how are the item and its creation cost affected?
    Item creation is mostly unaffected (although see the rules for Fireshaped items, DMGII 275). The Enhanced Magic trait only applies to spells as they are cast. However, a spell cast from an item would be affected, unless the trait says otherwise (such as the Astral Plane's Enhanced Magic trait, which explicitly does not apply to spells from magic items). If you used a normal wand of fireball while on the Plane of Fire, it would be enhanced.
    Last edited by Troacctid; 2016-10-03 at 12:46 AM.

  24. - Top - End - #294
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2015

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 177

    Does a rogue wielding a whip deal sneak attack and Str damage to an armored opponent even if the whip itself doesn't?
    Last edited by Huldaerus; 2016-10-03 at 03:59 AM.

  25. - Top - End - #295
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Debatra's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Kaeda
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    A 177

    No.
    Kaedanis Pyran, tai faernae.

    The LA Assignment Threads: Attempting to Make Monsters Playable Since 2016

    My Homebrewer's Extended Signature
    Spoiler: Quotes
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Roland just endorsed a crack pairing?


    Did... did we break the universe?
    Quote Originally Posted by SassyQuatch View Post
    It is a major flaw in the game. Destroy a moon? Sure. Talk to somebody a hundred miles away, that's going to be difficult.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rizban View Post
    Realistically speaking... D&D style magic doesn't exist, so... let's ignore reality.

  26. - Top - End - #296
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2012

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    A 177 Addendum

    To elaborate on debatra's answer, sneak attack damage is extra damage. you cannot have extra damage, when there is no base damage.

  27. - Top - End - #297
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2015

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 177 Addendum

    Doesn't str damage count as base damage?

    So, a rogue attacking with a 1d6+20 weapon cannot apply sneak attack to a DR 15/- monster neither. Right?

    How about a Duskblade delivering a shocking grasp through the whip with arcane channelling?
    Last edited by Huldaerus; 2016-10-03 at 04:50 AM.

  28. - Top - End - #298
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Debatra's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Kaeda
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by Huldaerus View Post
    How about a Duskblade delivering a shocking grasp through the whip with arcane channelling?
    That works because Arcane Channeling doesn't require the attack to do damage; only to hit.
    Kaedanis Pyran, tai faernae.

    The LA Assignment Threads: Attempting to Make Monsters Playable Since 2016

    My Homebrewer's Extended Signature
    Spoiler: Quotes
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Roland just endorsed a crack pairing?


    Did... did we break the universe?
    Quote Originally Posted by SassyQuatch View Post
    It is a major flaw in the game. Destroy a moon? Sure. Talk to somebody a hundred miles away, that's going to be difficult.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rizban View Post
    Realistically speaking... D&D style magic doesn't exist, so... let's ignore reality.

  29. - Top - End - #299
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Glorious NEPA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Q 178

    Would the Locate Object spell (PHB 249) find an item stored in extradimensional space? i.e. bag of holding. The bag of holding is within the spell range of 400 ft + 40 ft./level.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonsoul View Post
    so a blanket with a couple of eyeholes grants you immunity to targeted spells in addition to its +5 disguise bonus to impersonate a ghost?


    *** OMG, I am not even a PC...***

  30. - Top - End - #300
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ClericGirl

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Clockwork Nirvana
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #32: More Seasons than the Simpsons

    Quote Originally Posted by Troacctid View Post
    Item creation is mostly unaffected (although see the rules for Fireshaped items, DMGII 275). The Enhanced Magic trait only applies to spells as they are cast. However, a spell cast from an item would be affected, unless the trait says otherwise (such as the Astral Plane's Enhanced Magic trait, which explicitly does not apply to spells from magic items). If you used a normal wand of fireball while on the Plane of Fire, it would be enhanced.
    A 176 Addendum
    Looking more closely, this is correct and I was in error: you need to expend (& prepare, if you do that kind of thing) the spells that go into a crafted item as part of the crafting, but you are specifically not casting them (which means that the planar trait in question does not come into play, since it only affects spells & SLA at the time of casting).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •