Results 901 to 930 of 2721
Thread: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
-
2012-07-14, 01:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
But a monk's unarmed strike counts as a weapon, and so he gets the same effect from Flurry of Blows that he would get if he used the Two-Weapon Fighting action to make two unarmed strike attacks (both of which would get his full STRMOD) and had the TWF feat to reduce the penalties to -2/-2. Other characters can't duplicate this feat with their unarmed strikes because they're not monks, but the only thing that's unique to the monk in this scenario is the way his unarmed strike works; if a DM-created light weapon dealt 1d6 lethal or nonlethal bludgeoning and always added your STR bonus regardless of handedness, a character wielding two such weapons would function exactly like a monk doing two unarmed strikes (except that the monk could be kicking instead of punching while holding a mahogany armoire in his hands).
-
2012-07-14, 02:12 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
No:
Originally Posted by SRD
Even if it works similarly or exactly in the same way, it does not mean that it is the same thing.
-
2012-07-14, 04:00 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
There would appear to be a contradiction here. This was the entire point of my original question, and Curmudgeon indicated it was fine.
There, that should be the entire conversation.
I said "essentially", and you're getting into semantics. "It is the same thing" is true for all practical purposes, even if it isn't technically accurate.Last edited by willpell; 2012-07-14 at 04:08 AM.
-
2012-07-14, 05:25 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
TWF lets you make an off hand unarmed strike if your main hand attack is with a manufactured weapon. It also lets you make an off hand manufactured weapon attack if your main hand attack is an unarmed strike. This was what was answered in your original question. However, you cannot use two-weapon fighting rules with only unarmed attacks.
The only contradiction is in your attempt to equate two different attack forms, one of which is illegal by RAW.
Originally Posted by willpell
-
2012-07-14, 06:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
-
2012-07-14, 08:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
It's a good idea to look at links when someone (repeatedly) provides them as a resource.
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.Last edited by Curmudgeon; 2012-07-14 at 08:54 AM.
-
2012-07-14, 10:42 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q461 If I have two natural claw attacks does the feat Pisonic Fist boost one or both of my claws?
Q462 Apart from making the will save, what methods exist for a raging barbarian to ignore a Calm Emotions spell or the Serenity power (CP)?
-
2012-07-14, 10:48 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 462
For the spell there is always immunity to mind-affecting effects (Protection from Alignment, Mind-Blank etc.)Last edited by Andezzar; 2012-07-14 at 10:49 AM.
-
2012-07-14, 10:53 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Location
- Half past Crazy
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q463
Do you have to be a wizard to write spellbook pages that a wizard can use? Assume you can make any skill checks required.
-
2012-07-14, 11:44 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
I did. It provided no clarification on unarmed strikes whatsoever, save for the fact that it counts as a light weapon. And thus it follows logically that two of them count as two light weapons. I can't fathom why you are so certain that every character is not capable of two unarmed strikes; I have never once seen any rule in the book that says "A character's entire body provides only one unarmed strike". They do say something like "a character can make an unarmed strike", but they also say stuff like "a character can make a melee attack with a weapon"; this sort of language is far from ironclad.
Absent rules clarity, we must default to common sense, and common sense says that if you can use an unarmed strike as a one-handed (light) weapon, you can use two of them as two such weapons.
You must have two weapons to use the two-weapon fighting rules.
You only have a single unarmed strike.Last edited by willpell; 2012-07-14 at 11:51 AM.
-
2012-07-14, 02:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Re: A 456
Here's a rule for you. The spell Magic Weapon applies to a single weapon touched. If you have two identical swords in your left and right hands and cast this on the right hand sword it would have different properties than the left hand sword. If you cast this spell on a Monk it affects their single unarmed strike; their right and left hands and all other body parts are affected because they're only one weapon and never have different weapon properties. You cannot boost just a Monk's right hand separately any more than you can boost only a sword's right edge: it's not a separate weapon, half of a double weapon, or anything else distinguishable by game mechanics ─ just a part of a single weapon.
Originally Posted by willpell
A 461
The power affects a single natural weapon, not a group.
A 463 Yes.Adding Spells to a Wizard’s Spellbook
Wizards can add new spells to their spellbooks through several methods.Last edited by Curmudgeon; 2012-07-14 at 03:05 PM.
-
2012-07-14, 05:07 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
- Somewhere Warm
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q 264: Do Half-Elves trance or sleep?
On a quest to marry Asmodeus, lord of the Nine Hells, or die trying.
-
2012-07-14, 05:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 462 (partial): While it doesn't allow you to ignore them, the Mad Foam Rager feat from PHB II allows you to delay the effect of "a single attack, spell, or ability used against you" until the end of your next turn. Of course, I don't know whether a psionic power counts as an ability in this context.
-
2012-07-14, 05:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Location
- The Great White North
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
-
2012-07-14, 08:31 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Fl
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q465 Is the fire damage from a Flaming Sap non-lethal?
-
2012-07-14, 08:38 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q 466a Are PCs creatures? If not, what are they?
Q 466b Suppose a PC Human Wizard casts Alter Self to turn into a Tren, whose stat block contains Claw/Claw/Bite. Can the PC use this in a full attack, or is he restricted to attacks based on BaB?
Either way, please, provide as much direct textual evidence as possible.Originally Posted by The Giant
-
2012-07-14, 09:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Location
- The Great White North
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 465
No. The Flaming property on a vanilla sap deals fire damage.
A 466a
Yes, PCs count as creatures.
A 466b
The aforementioned wizard would be able to use all three attacks as a full round action, taking a -5 penalty on the secondary attack(s). The primary attack is the one(s) specified in the 'Attack' option.
From the d20 SRD
Originally Posted by d20 SRD
-
2012-07-14, 09:27 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q466a continued Does there exist textual evidence supporting 466a, that PCs are creatures?
Originally Posted by The Giant
-
2012-07-14, 09:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Location
- The Great White North
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
PHB - in the description for any of the common races, it mentions their size category, followed by this line (for humans, for example):
Originally Posted by Player's Handbook
Q 467
What happens if you advance a prestige class separate spellcasting beyond effective 10th level (like, for example, a Wizard 3/Temple Raider 7/Mystic Theurge 10)?Last edited by Kuulvheysoon; 2012-07-14 at 09:59 PM.
-
2012-07-15, 01:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Okay, I understand now, thank you.
To have two unarmed strikes you need two bodies.
He asked "do they trance or sleep", so "no" is not the correct answer. They sleep.
Where is this established? Is it likewise true that all spells are spell-like abilities?Last edited by willpell; 2012-07-15 at 01:17 AM.
-
2012-07-15, 02:53 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
-
2012-07-15, 07:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q468
Question on the applicability of templates. The Half-Celestial template can be applied to any nonevil creature, and it changes the creature's alignment to good. Do the template's benefits disappear if the character's actions during the game change him to evil? Or does being "naturally" Good as a result of his template prohibit him from such actions?
-
2012-07-15, 09:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Location
- Half past Crazy
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q469
If you take a page out of a wizard's spellbook (as in literately remove it), could some other wizard use it to prepare spells? Assume this other wizard can make the skill checks, and that it is a first level spell, and so fits on one page.Last edited by qwertyu63; 2012-07-15 at 10:00 AM. Reason: fixing number
-
2012-07-15, 11:46 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Kitchener/Waterloo
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Lord Raziere herd I like Blasphemy, so Urpriest Exalted as a Malefactor
Meet My Monstrous Guide to Monsters. Everything you absolutely need to know about Monsters and never thought you needed to ask.
Trophy!
-
2012-07-15, 11:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Kitchener/Waterloo
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 468
Templates only check for applicability when applied (hence why you can use multiple type-changing templates to get from one type to another). A Half-Celestial is Always Good, which per the Monster Manual Glossary means that Half-Celestials may change alignment but only in rare and unique cases.Lord Raziere herd I like Blasphemy, so Urpriest Exalted as a Malefactor
Meet My Monstrous Guide to Monsters. Everything you absolutely need to know about Monsters and never thought you needed to ask.
Trophy!
-
2012-07-15, 11:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Heh, the more "rare and unusual" the circumstance is, the harder some Special Snowflake will campaign to get to be the 14,000th consecutive "sole exception" (also known as "Drizzt Syndrome"). What I'm looking at here is the idea of a Half-Celestial who changes to Neutral through their actions, and then applies the Half-Fiend template (there are various spells and powers and whatnot that make this possible, though at least most are temporary). The implications of that are probably beyond the scope of this thread though.
-
2012-07-15, 12:12 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
So you are saying since neither of the spells create a bag of holding or a portable hole, bringing any of those into the extradimensional space created by the spell is safe, since there is no rule how they will interact?
There is this bit though:
Originally Posted by SRD on Rope Trick
Are there any rules for the internal dimensions for bags of holding, Handy haversacks etc.? could you for example fit a 30ft x 1 ft x 1ft cuboid into a bag of holding if it weighs less than 250 lbs?
Are the openings of the containers a limitation for the size of an item? If so what are they for the compartments of a Handy Haversack?
-
2012-07-15, 02:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- Minnesnowta
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
Q471
Does the Trapsmith PrC from Dungeonscape suffer from Arcane Spellcasting Failure when wearing light armor?Last edited by Menteith; 2012-07-15 at 02:34 PM.
-
2012-07-15, 03:48 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2012
- Location
- Avalon
- Gender
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A471
No, I don't believe Arcane Spellcasting Failure applies here. The class says it casts arcane spells as a Bard does, and Bards may cast freely while wearing light armor.Last edited by Mightypickle; 2012-07-15 at 03:57 PM.
A man has to come to terms with life as it is.
-
2012-07-15, 04:35 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Sunnydale
Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI
A 470 No.
Any container described as nondimensional doesn't have interior dimensions, just weight and volume limits. As for size limits for the openings, you'll need to take that up with your individual DM because the rules don't provide any guidance. Anything up to what would fit into the compartment openings of a mundane backpack is fine, and beyond that it's a matter for DM discretion.