Results 871 to 900 of 2721
Thread: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
-
2012-07-12, 03:30 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Imagination Land
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
-
2012-07-12, 06:14 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Mountain View, CA
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A445
Your preferred interpretation requires parsing a portion of the sentence as a (if I've got the terminology right) non-essential dependent clause. The comma at the end of such a clause is not optional. Parsing the sentence that way is objectively incorrect by the rules of English written grammar. Additionally, such clauses are supposed to be used only for information that is mostly incidental to the meaning of the sentence, and this clause is most certainly not incidental.
You can speculate about typos all you want, but the rules as written are completely unambiguously clear - the swift action is required regardless of your choice for the other part of the recovery cost.
You have your answer for RAW. If you want to discuss RAI (which I personally believe match RAW exactly in this case) or possible house rules, you should start a separate thread to do so.Last edited by Douglas; 2012-07-12 at 06:21 PM.
Like 4X (aka Civilization-like) gaming? Know programming? Interested in game development? Take a look.
Avatar by Ceika.
Archives:
SpoilerSaberhagen's Twelve Swords, some homebrew artifacts for 3.5 (please comment)
Isstinen Tonche for ECL 74 playtesting.
Team Solars: Powergaming beyond your wildest imagining, without infinite loops or epic. Yes, the DM asked for it.
Arcane Swordsage: Making it actually work (homebrew)
-
2012-07-12, 07:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q 446
On a tangent from the discussion above - for a Warblade recovering maneuvers, does a full attack count as "a melee attack"? Or does it have to be a standard-action attack?
-
2012-07-12, 07:23 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Location
- Denver.
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
This came up in my question about Line of Sight:
Q447: How tall is a creature's "square"?
Is it a two dimensional footprint on the ground, infinitely tall, a cube with a height equal to its width, equal in height to the creature's narrative size, or something else?Last edited by Talakeal; 2012-07-12 at 07:23 PM.
-
2012-07-12, 08:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Location
- Hell's Heart
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q 448
Are anthropomorphic squids (Savage Species pg. 217) amphibious?
Q 449
Are there any rules for a "breather" item that lets aquatic creatures breathe air?Last edited by Lateral; 2012-07-12 at 08:16 PM.
-
2012-07-12, 09:24 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 446
Any melee attack will suffice, so a full attack which includes at least one melee attack meets the requirement.
A 447
D&D treats spaces as squares on a 2-dimensional map, and as cubes on a 3-dimensional map. While many creatures will be taller than the height of their cubes, that normally doesn't affect the creature's combat space any more than reaching to attack other squares does. (This combat simplification doesn't keep tall creatures from squeezing to avoid hitting their heads on a low ceiling.)
A 448 No.
From footnote 2 to Table A–58: Adjustments for Anthropomorphic Animals (cont.):Octopi and squids can hold their breath out of the water twice as long as humans can hold their breath under the water.Last edited by Curmudgeon; 2012-07-12 at 09:32 PM.
-
2012-07-12, 10:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
This never got answered:
To clarify, if you and your buddy both have DR and you Share Pain with him, is the damage reduced twice? If you have DR, do you apply it before or after splitting the damage with your buddy? If your buddy has DR, does it apply to damage dumped on him by Share Pain even when you didn't have DR?
-
2012-07-12, 10:29 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- The Pits of Hell
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q 450
Can undead(like a vampire or a death knight specifically) drink a potion?
-
2012-07-12, 10:32 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- USA
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A450 Yes. whitetext
ze/zir | she/her
Omnia Vincit Amor
-
2012-07-13, 01:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q451
Warblade maneuver recovery
Do I get this right?
You can recover your maneuvers (swift action) attack (standard action) and move away (move action)
Or you can move (move) recover the maneuvers (swift) and make an attack (standard)
But you cannot recover your maneuvers (swift), move (move) and then attack (standard).
-
2012-07-13, 03:28 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
- Location
- UK
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A409
DR only applies to direct physical damage - and it stops that part of the damage from happening. Thus for both Share Pain and Sheild Other if the person hit has DR then apply the DR to the damage and then Share Pain/Shield Other to the residual damage.
Since the damage taken by the linked person is not due to a physical attack then DR has no relevance to the damage rtaken.
-
2012-07-13, 08:04 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q452
can ability bonuses other than enhancement and inherent bonuses be granted by magic items? (and how?)Last edited by D@rK-SePHiRoTH-; 2012-07-13 at 08:04 AM.
-
2012-07-13, 08:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A452
There are a legion of possible answers; you might want to narrow the question down. If you're looking specifically for increases to Attributes it's harder; things like a +2 competence bonus to certain Skill checks are not too hard to come by, and there are probably quite a few odd examples in the Wondrous Items, so it might be easier if you specified exactly what you're looking for.
-
2012-07-13, 08:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Only attributes (ability scores), not skills
-
2012-07-13, 09:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- USA
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
ze/zir | she/her
Omnia Vincit Amor
-
2012-07-13, 12:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q453
If you have several instances of the same type of ability from different sources like a racial gaze and temporary gaze from a spell or sorcerer spells from race and favored soul spells from class would one instance of Ability Focus (spells) or Ability Focus (gaze) cover them both?
Q454
If you can cover multiple instances of ability of the same name with the same Ability Focus can you use this to carry Ability Focus to things you couldn't normally affect with it. For example if you are a Drow NPC that takes Ability Focus (poison) and then gains a poisonous bite attack would the DC of the bite poison be increased?
Q455
What exactly does it mean to be "immune to an effect" and is there a game mechanic definition of effect? For example, Raptor's Mask (MIC, 210) makes you immune to effects that would leave you blinded or dazzled. Would this protect a vampire from getting destroyed by natural sunlight if you had the Light Sensitivity flaw or your base race had that feature? If someone hits you with an attack like the Falling Star Strike (OA, 62) is the whole attack considered to be part of the "effect which would leave you blinded" (assuming you fail the save)?
-
2012-07-13, 12:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 453 No.
Ability Focus applies only to one special attack. A group of spells, or multiple gaze attacks, are not "covered" by a single instance of this feat; you must select an individual special attack each time you take Ability Focus.Originally Posted by Ability FocusLast edited by Curmudgeon; 2012-07-13 at 12:57 PM.
-
2012-07-13, 01:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q453 clarification
Note that it is one Ability Focus per listed special attack not one Ability Focus per saving throw required or something. Marut inevitables for example have only one Ability Focus for what seems to be two different abilities in one since they are both listed under Fists of Thunder and Lightning special attack. In the same manner spells are also listed as a single special attack.
So I think the correct question would be if you have two gazes (from different sources) would they both be listed as a single Gaze special attack and thus both would benefit from the same Ability Focus?
I haven't noticed any examples of this in the books but for creatures that have several racial gazes they should be listed as one Special Attack (like Demogorgon, FC1 62, though that might be different as the description is unusual).
Q454
See above.
-
2012-07-13, 07:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q456
Is it ever possible to use Two-Weapon Fighting to make an extra Unarmed Strike? I'm confused by the Monk's line "there is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed". If my monk has a nunchaku in one hand and is keeping the other hand free for Deflect Arrows, can he attack once with the nunchaku and once with unarmed strike? Does he have to designate the unarmed strike as the primary attack?
Q457
Enlarge Person and Reduce Person both call for a Fortitude save; can an ally intentionally fail this save in order to ensure they're affected? This also has implications in terms of Erudites learning powers from each other, since the target gets a Will save to resist having their brain picked.
-
2012-07-13, 08:38 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- Terra Australis
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 457
Yes. A character may always chose to voluntarily fail a saving throw.
Originally Posted by Rules Compendium p.112My winning competition entries: Kinvig Arrumskor | The Great Pumpkinhead | Wynfrith d'Acker
Torn-City - Massively multiplayer online browser based crime RPG
-
2012-07-13, 08:41 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- Terra Australis
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q 458
Would a Monk's Unarmed Strike count as a melee weapon for use with the Death Devotion feat ability to inflict negative levels?
A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.My winning competition entries: Kinvig Arrumskor | The Great Pumpkinhead | Wynfrith d'Acker
Torn-City - Massively multiplayer online browser based crime RPG
-
2012-07-13, 10:06 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Location
- The Great White North
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q 459
What kind of Divine Focus does a Warmage use (when casting Flame Strike, for example)?
-
2012-07-13, 10:07 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 456 Yes.
Two-weapon fighting rules require you to have a second weapon available for off hand attacks, and one of those can be an unarmed strike. In 3.5 D&D with the removal of 3.0 Ambidexterity from the game, "main hand" and "off hand" are weapon access categorizations, and neither of these are required to actually involve a hand. You could, for instance, attack with a boot blade as your "main hand" weapon, and a head butt as your "off hand" weapon. Your Monk with a nunchaku could attack with any available part of their body for unarmed strikes; they don't need a free hand for that.
The above rules are pertinent to all classes fighting with two weapons, including (partly) unarmed.There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.
A 458 Yes.
For the reason you quoted. Death Devotion would affect the Monk's unarmed strike (i.e., their whole body) as the chosen melee weapon.
A 459
The character could use any divine focus appropriate to their beliefs.Last edited by Curmudgeon; 2012-07-13 at 10:13 PM.
-
2012-07-13, 10:14 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
I thought this was only true during Flurry of Blows? You're saying that if my monk has a longsword in one hand and a light shield in the other (don't ask how he became proficient), he can attack with the longsword and with a kick (taking -2/-2 if he has TWF and -4/-8 otherwise) and add his full Strength bonus to both attacks? But if he attacks with the longsword and bashes with the shield, the shield only gets half his Strength bonus?
-
2012-07-13, 10:23 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
You're missing the word "unarmed" there.
-
2012-07-13, 10:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
What if they have no beliefs?
Not sure what you mean here. Where I said "kick", read it as "unarmed strike with a non-hand". You yourself said I can use an unarmed strike along with a weapon.
Q460
This is regarding the optional Unearthed Arcana rule for Reducing Level Adjustments. Say that I'm a Hobgoblin (+1 LA). If I do not take the opportunity to buy down my LA at level 3, do I have the option of doing it upon reaching level 4 or level 5? Do I have to wait until level 6? Or have I missed the only chance I ever get?Last edited by willpell; 2012-07-13 at 10:47 PM.
-
2012-07-13, 11:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Re: A 456
There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed.
A 460
According the the letter of the rules, you'll have missed the chance.Under this variant system, the character can pay an XP cost at certain intervals to decrease the burden of his level adjustment.
Once the total of a character's class levels (not including any Hit Dice from his creature type or his level adjustment) reaches three times his level adjustment, his level adjustment is eligible to be decreased by 1.
...
Each time a character's level adjustment is eligible to be reduced, the character may pay an XP cost to take advantage of the reduction.
-
2012-07-13, 11:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- USA
- Gender
-
2012-07-14, 01:17 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
In that case, it just dawned on me that a first-level Monk's Flurry of Blows is essentially Two-Weapon Fighting with two unarmed strikes (and the feat of the same name being replaced by the Flurry class feature), is that correct?
Last edited by willpell; 2012-07-14 at 01:18 AM.
-
2012-07-14, 01:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Not at all. The only similarity is that you get the same penalty as for two weapons when one is a light one. The obvious difference is that you are talking about two unarmed attacks and not two attacks with weapons, the other is that both unarmed attacks get the full STR mod to damage, while the off-hand weapon only gets 1/2 STR.