Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #35: 3/2 Score And Four Threads Ago

[Talakeal]

Q 431:

If neutralize poison is cast on a character with multiple poisons in their system, does it cure all of them or just one? If its the latter, what about multiple doses of the same poison?

[Segev]

Q 431:

If neutralize poison is cast on a character with multiple poisons in their system, does it cure all of them or just one? If its the latter, what about multiple doses of the same poison?

A 431:

Given that the target of the spell is "one creature" and the following paragraph:

The creature is immune to any poison it is exposed to during the duration of the spell. Unlike with delay poison, such effects aren’t postponed until after the duration —the creature need not make any saves against poison effects applied to it during the length of the spell.

The creature being immune to any poison to which it's exposed suggests that all poisons are negated, not just one. Though the paragraph before discusses "the poison," it is clear from the second that the immunity is comprehensive, and there's no reason to assume the cure is not. At no point does the spell specify that you must choose one poison.

Heck, the opening statement is:

You detoxify any sort of venom in the creature or object touched.

"Any sort" is pretty clear. If there's poison, it's neutralized.

[Talakeal]

A 431:

Given that the target of the spell is "one creature" and the following paragraph:



The creature being immune to any poison to which it's exposed suggests that all poisons are negated, not just one. Though the paragraph before discusses "the poison," it is clear from the second that the immunity is comprehensive, and there's no reason to assume the cure is not. At no point does the spell specify that you must choose one poison.

Heck, the opening statement is:

"Any sort" is pretty clear. If there's poison, it's neutralized.

That is my reading as well. My DM reads “the poison” as singular and “any sort” meaning any one poison rather than “every sort”.

[Segev]

That is my reading as well. My DM reads “the poison” as singular and “any sort” meaning any one poison rather than “every sort”.

Further discussion probably warrants its own thread.

[Doctor Awkward]

That is my reading as well. My DM reads “the poison” as singular and “any sort” meaning any one poison rather than “every sort”.

Your DM is incorrect. The word "sort" in common parlance is by definition "a group set up on the basis of any characteristic in common." In the context of that spell, this group is poison, which is a class of special attacks in D&D 3.5 that inflict damage to a creature. If your DM were correct, the spell would so instruct you, as Segev noted, to select which poison that you are affecting when you cast it.

Q432

This occurred to me when I was double-checking the Bull Rush rules for another thread.
The Knockback feat in Races of Stone allows you to make a free bull rush attempt when you hit with any attack that you use the Power Attack feat. It states that you do not provoke attacks of opportunity as normal and if you wish you do not have to move with your opponent. But other than that is seems to follow all the normal rules for bull rushing, which makes me wonder the following:

1. Do you still have to enter your opponents space? Step 1 of initiating a bull rush attempt is to enter your opponents space, which would occur after the succesful attack.
2. The movement restriction still seems to be in place. So if you have 30 feet of movement and charge 60 feet to reach your opponent, then would you not be able to move them at all on account of being out of movement for the round, even if you could easily win the check?

Thoughts?

[Hellpyre]

A432

For the first point, it's arguable that the feat description indicates that you don't close, just hit them, but the rules seem pretty clear that moving into the space is how you initiate the bull rush manueuver, and nothing in the feat negates that.

The second point is much simpler. Since the feat simply states you don't move with the opponent, and the bull rush rules state that you can't exceed your movement pushing them, it is fairly clear that you can in fact push them even without movement for the space you knock them back (though you may need at least the 5 feet of movement left to move into their space, to even try to make the check)

[Jowgen]

Q 433

Is it true that "change all current and future HD to d12" applies to all undead across the board? If so, where is this spelled out?

[Thurbane]

Q 433

Is it true that "change all current and future HD to d12" applies to all undead across the board? If so, where is this spelled out?

A 433

It applies to Undead RHD, and to Undead templates that spell out a change of HD type, such as Vampire.

It is possible for Undead to have class level HD that are not d12. For instance, a Mummy Cleric 10 would have 8d12 plus 10d8 HD,

Short answer: HD type only change as/if specified by the creature/template.

[Thurbane]

Q 434

Is the spell Nightmare Lullaby considered a "magic sleep effect" for Elf immunity?

[Bartmanhomer]

Q 434

Is the spell Nightmare Lullaby considered a "magic sleep effect" for Elf immunity?

A 434

Yes. Elves are immune to sleep, especially magic sleep effects.

[Doctor Awkward]

A 434

Yes. Elves are immune to sleep, especially magic sleep effects.

No. Nightmare Lullaby is not a sleep effect. It causes confusion. Elves do, however, get a +2 racial bonus to their save because it is an Enchantment spell.

[Bartmanhomer]

No. Nightmare Lullaby is not a sleep effect. It causes confusion. Elves do, however, get a +2 racial bonus to their save because it is an Enchantment spell.

Really? I didn't know that.

[heavyfuel]

No. Nightmare Lullaby is not a sleep effect. It causes confusion. Elves do, however, get a +2 racial bonus to their save because it is an Enchantment spell.

Strong disagree. My version of SpC reads: Your music calms your foe, sending it to sleep while it remains upright.

You can argue that this is only "flavor text" but that's a MtG rule, not a D&D rule. I say text written in a rulebook is rules text, making elves immune.

I do not think further discussion is necessary. The "flavor text" discussion has been had in the past and in the end it's up to each DM to rule whether or not to consider them RAW

Q 435

How loud do you have to say a command word to activate an item? I know that you need "a strong voice" for verbal spell components, but is there any rule for items?

[Debatra]

Strong disagree. My version of SpC reads: Your music calms your foe, sending it to sleep while it remains upright.

You can argue that this is only "flavor text" but that's a MtG rule, not a D&D rule. I say text written in a rulebook is rules text, making elves immune.

I do not think further discussion is necessary. The "flavor text" discussion has been had in the past and in the end it's up to each DM to rule whether or not to consider them RAW

Actually, there is a distinction between rules text and flavor text in D&D. The Spell compendium even reiterates it.

Descriptive Passages: The first thing you’re likely to note is a descriptive passage in italics. This serves much the same purpose as the italicized descriptions of monsters in the Monster Manual: It lets you know what the spell looks like, sounds like, or feels like to cast. The text in this section presents the spell from the spellcaster’s view and describes what its typically like to cast the spell. The descriptive passages shouldn’t be considered to be binding rules. A grand gesture indicated by a spell’s descriptive passage is unnecessary if you use the Still Spell feat to cast it, and even though a descriptive passage describes you casting a spell on another creature, it might be possible to cast the spell on yourself, depending on the spell’s target entry and the rules for spellcasting in the Player’s Handbook.

[King of Nowhere]

Q436: a) what spells/effects are available to increase the size of an ally (so, range of personal won't work) by more than one size category? (besides polymorphing into something completely different, of course)

b) what spells/effects are available to increase the size of a dragon that's currently middle sized?

[Nezkrul]

Q436: a) what spells/effects are available to increase the size of an ally (so, range of personal won't work) by more than one size category? (besides polymorphing into something completely different, of course)

b) what spells/effects are available to increase the size of a dragon that's currently middle sized?

These are not RAW questions. Start your own thread to ask for help

[Debatra]

These are not RAW questions. Start your own thread to ask for help

How are these not RAW questions?

[King of Nowhere]

These are not RAW questions. Start your own thread to ask for help

asking for what spells can produce a certain specific effect is a perfectly legitimate raw question, and it is far from the first time someone posted a similar question here.
it's also a simple question because i expect the answer to be along the lines of "[xyz spell], from spell compendium" or "there is nothing printed with that effect short of epic"

[Thurbane]

Q 437

Order of operations question, that came up in last night's game.

A Fang dragon has SR 20, and also has Spell Turning and Shield SLAs up. It gets hit with Magic Missiles. Do I check the Spell Turning first, the SR, or the Shield blocking the MMs?

If MM is not a legal target to be blocked by ST, same question, but substitute an eligible spell such as Tasha's Hideous Laughter: in what order would I check SR and ST?

Basically, wanting to know If Spell Turing kicks in before - or after - other defenses such as Spell Resistance.

Q 438

I vaguely recall that with spells like Magic Missile, SR is checked separately against each missile hitting the creature. Is this correct? I may possibly be thinking of a 2E rule in error.

[Powerdork]

Q 437

Order of operations question, that came up in last night's game.

A Fang dragon has SR 20, and also has Spell Turning and Shield SLAs up. It gets hit with Magic Missiles. Do I check the Spell Turning first, the SR, or the Shield blocking the MMs?

If MM is not a legal target to be blocked by ST, same question, but substitute an eligible spell such as Tasha's Hideous Laughter: in what order would I check SR and ST?

Basically, wanting to know If Spell Turing kicks in before - or after - other defenses such as Spell Resistance.

A 437: Per the Dungeon Master's Guide, page 299 (When Spell Resistance Applies), "Spell resistance has no effect unless the energy created or released by the spell actually goes to work on the resistant creature’s mind or body," and "Spell resistance can protect a creature from a spell that’s already been cast. Check spell resistance when the creature is first affected by the spell."
This seems to suggest that spell resistance is sort of the step after you ask "is there a chance I can just act like the spell won't ever get to me?" (SR is only checked at first contact; example is an ogre mage flying into a wall of fire, in which case the answer to that question is no) and "it's my turn to suffer the consequences of this effect" (magic missile has a chance to resolve; as part of resolving magic missile, you can call to the table's attention that shield is active and protects against magic missile specifically). If you abide by this logic, the order of operations is spell turning before other things that say "this doesn't happen".

(This is complicated if you say that targeted spells with lasting durations—in particular shield—are not protected by spells affecting the user the same way gear tends to be. Think about if someone had used dispel magic on the shield spell hovering in front of the fang dragon, instead of the fang dragon itself. If the shield is dispelled without the dispel being checked against spell turning first, then it might also provide its protection against magic missile before spell turning even looks at it.)

Q 438

I vaguely recall that with spells like Magic Missile, SR is checked separately against each missile hitting the creature. Is this correct? I may possibly be thinking of a 2E rule in error.

A 438: Not quite. In the Dungeon Master's Guide, the glossary entry for spell resistance notes,

Check spell resistance only once for any particular casting of a spell or use of a spell-like ability.

However, the same section does expect you to check SR for each defending creature independently, in case you wanted to split up those magic missiles between the fang dragon and a brass dragon.

Targeted Spells: Spell resistance applies if the spell is targeted at the creature. Some individually targeted spells, such as magic missile when cast by a 3rd-level caster, can be directed at several creatures simultaneously. In such cases, a creature’s spell resistance applies only to the portion of the spell actually targeted at that creature. If several different resistant creatures are subjected to such a spell, each checks its spell resistance separately.

[bean illus]

Question 439 Can the alternate ranger combat style (Dragon 341) Piscator (Exotic Weapon (net) /Improved Trip /Improved Critical) combine with
Warbade's Weapon Aptitude (Ex) to allow Spiked Chain proficiency?

[Thurbane]

A 439

I'm assuming you are referring to Piscator (Dragon 326 p.97), your combat style gives EWP: Net at 2nd level, instead of the usual Rapid Shot or TWF.

As per the SRD, a Ranger is "treated as" if had the relevant feats for his Combat Style. Weapon Aptitude states "change the designated weapon for any feat you have". A Ranger, while treated as having these feats, does not actually have the feats to use Weapon Aptitude with.

So by my reading: no.

[bean illus]

Question 439 follow up
So, ... ranger combat styles can't be used to qualify for feats? Ranger 6 doesn't qualify for greater manyshot? Champion of the Wild Ranger 8 can't use it's "bonus feat" to pick improved rapid shot without taking manyshot and rapid shot feats, because combat styles aren't feats? That seems counterintuitive.

Because I see a lot of builds that do things like that. What's the sense of dipping ranger if the feats don't synergize with anything?

I'm thinking that if CotW qualifies for using it's own class features (Scout swift hunter builds also), then "treated as if" means in every way except "even if he does not have the normal prerequisites".

[Thurbane]

Question 439 follow up
So, ... ranger combat styles can't be used to qualify for feats? Ranger 6 doesn't qualify for greater manyshot? Champion of the Wild Ranger 8 can't use it's "bonus feat" to pick improved rapid shot without taking manyshot and rapid shot feats, because combat styles aren't feats? That seems counterintuitive.

Because I see a lot of builds that do things like that. What's the sense of dipping ranger if the feats don't synergize with anything?

I'm thinking that if CotW qualifies for using it's own class features (Scout swift hunter builds also), then "treated as if" means in every way except "even if he does not have the normal prerequisites".

A 439 continued

The Ranger is treated as having the feats, so those "virtual" feats do count for prereqs: if you were looking to enter a PrC or take a feat which required EWP, then you should qualify. I'm pretty sure there is a rules citation backing this up, but I can't locate it right now.

However, the wording of Weapon Aptitude is pretty clear that it only affects a "feat you have": you don't technically have the feat - you are treated as having the feat, which is a subtle difference.

Feel free to seek additional opinions though: other readings of the RAW may well differ to mine.

[newguydude1]

Q440

Does practiced spellcaster work with artificer infusions?

[Hellpyre]

A440: No, because Artificer explictly states it is not a spellcaster and thus does not qualify for the feat.

[Piggy Knowles]

Q441: Can a barbarian/psychic warrior manifest powers while raging?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Q441: Can a barbarian/psychic warrior manifest powers while raging?

A441: Not normally, no. Barbarian rage says the following:

While raging, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except for Balance, Escape Artist, Intimidate, and Ride), the Concentration skill, or any abilities that require patience or concentration, nor can he cast spells or activate magic items that require a command word, a spell trigger (such as a wand), or spell completion (such as a scroll) to function.

Powers typically require concentration when manifesting:

Concentration
To manifest a power, you must concentrate. If something threatens to interrupt your concentration while you’re manifesting a power, you must succeed on a Concentration check or lose the power points without manifesting the power. The more distracting the interruption and the higher the level of the power that you are trying to manifest, the higher the DC. (Higher-level powers require more mental effort.)

However, applying the Supernatural Transformation feat to your psionics forgoes the Concentration requirement, so you should be able to rage and still manifest using your (Su) powers.

...supernatural abilities do not provoke attacks of opportunity and never require Concentration checks.

Q442: I recall there being a druid spell that allows you to permanently turn wasteland into lush, green fields and forests, and it protects the plants from the ravages of the otherwise lethal environment. What spell is it, and where is it found?

[St Fan]

Q 443
Can you make a trip attack on an opponent you are currently grappling with?

Q 444
Is a grapple check an ability check? It is modified by Strength, but is otherwise not called a Strength check (instead, the SRD calls it similar to an attack roll), so do modifiers to ability checks/Strength checks (as opposed to modifiers to Strength itself) affect a grapple check?

[ZamielVanWeber]

Q 445
Was the summon nature's ally list ever expanded like summon monster was and, if so, is there a list with the names of the monsters?