(PF) Why is entangling the opponent considered a strong debuff?

[Zangief1983]

I often come across the forums and many people suggest taking feats like Rime Spell when playing a wizard or a witch they say entangling is one the better debuffs in the game. Why is that? All I'm seeing is that there movement is slowed , they suffer -2 to hit and a -4 to Dex . Is there anything else?

[BWR]

That's plenty. Those penalties are quite impressive. Just look at it compared to many other debuffs. And you are adding this for one spell level, no save. It's a good feat.

[Florian]

I often come across the forums and many people suggest taking feats like Rime Spell when playing a wizard or a witch they say entangling is one the better debuffs in the game. Why is that? All I'm seeing is that there movement is slowed , they suffer -2 to hit and a -4 to Dex . Is there anything else?

"Entangled: The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) or lose the spell."

It´s not that movement is slowed, both, running away and charging towards you is shut down, and forcing casters to pass concentration checks without threatening them is a boon.

[Psyren]

I often come across the forums and many people suggest taking feats like Rime Spell when playing a wizard or a witch they say entangling is one the better debuffs in the game. Why is that? All I'm seeing is that there movement is slowed , they suffer -2 to hit and a -4 to Dex . Is there anything else?

Those aren't good enough?

There's also the fact that if the entangling effect is affixed to something immobile, the victim cannot move at all, making them easy prey for your ranged attackers.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Don't you (temporarily) lose access to some of your abilities, if you no longer meet the prerequisites? That's potentially even more troublesome than having trouble moving.

[Kayblis]

The thing is, it's rare to be immune to entanglement. The penalties are fine(movement, -2 to hit/AC/reflex, -4 total to ranged atks, Concentration checks for casters...) and you'll notice there's something that affects everyone there. Melee bruisers move slowly and get -2 to most of his stuff, ranged ones get a big penalty(same as cover) and LOSE RAPID SHOT BONUSES if they have less than 17 Dex, casters now can fail at casting and critters are basically done before they can reach the party. Wide-ranging debuffs like that are very valuable, and how easy it is to get them at such low levels where flat penalties work the best make them invaluable to tactical classes, usually the Wizard.

[Florian]

You confuse "penalty" and "drain".

[Gruftzwerg]

You confuse "penalty" and "drain".

Doesn't change the outcome. Since bonuses can help you meeting the requirements, the opposite: penalties can prevent you from meeting the requirements.

I guess "drain" is clear and needs no explanation that it also effects you for meeting requirements.

[TheFamilarRaven]

Doesn't change the outcome. Since bonuses can help you meeting the requirements, the opposite: penalties can prevent you from meeting the requirements.

I guess "drain" is clear and needs no explanation that it also effects you for meeting requirements.

Temporary bonuses do not allow you to meet prerequisites. Permanent bonuses can, though. So, if your Strength score was 12, the spell Bull's Strength would not allow you to take or use Power Attack, but a Belt of Giant's Strength +2 can, (after it has been worn for 24 hours), since it raises your score to 14.

Likewise, temporary Penalties to ability scores do not prevent character from using abilities that require a minimum ability score.



Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.




Diseases, poisons, spells, and other abilities can all deal damage directly to your ability scores. This damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability.


Thus, a wizard with a Intelligence of 17, can still cast 7th level spells even if they have an intelligence penalty, only their spell DCs are affected.

But, as others have said. Ability drain does actually alter your score, thus can prevent you from meeting prerequisites

[Crake]

Temporary bonuses do not allow you to meet prerequisites. Permanent bonuses can, though. So, if your Strength score was 12, the spell Bull's Strength would not allow you to take or use Power Attack, but a Belt of Giant's Strength +2 can, (after it has been worn for 24 hours), since it raises your score to 14.

Likewise, temporary Penalties to ability scores do not prevent character from using abilities that require a minimum ability score.





Thus, a wizard with a Intelligence of 17, can still cast 7th level spells even if they have an intelligence penalty, only their spell DCs are affected.

But, as others have said. Ability drain does actually alter your score, thus can prevent you from meeting prerequisites

Nice, I didn't realise this. It certainly works in 3.5, neato little change in pathfinder.

[Florian]

Nice, I didn't realise this. It certainly works in 3.5, neato little change in pathfinder.

Ability damage or penalties due to spells/SU are far less severe in PF than they used to be in 3.5E.
The main change is that you don´t have to recalculate the ability, but only apply the penalty to all derived scores. For example, that also means that a Cleric hit with Wisdom damage doesn´t lose the ability to heal himself back up with lesser restoration, as you don´t recalculate spell access and bonus spells. Even without it, the damage heals at a rate of 1 point per hour.

That has pretty much taken the sting of monsters like Allip or Shadow.

[exelsisxax]

Ability damage or penalties due to spells/SU are far less severe in PF than they used to be in 3.5E.
The main change is that you don´t have to recalculate the ability, but only apply the penalty to all derived scores. For example, that also means that a Cleric hit with Wisdom damage doesn´t lose the ability to heal himself back up with lesser restoration, as you don´t recalculate spell access and bonus spells. Even without it, the damage heals at a rate of 1 point per hour.

That has pretty much taken the sting of monsters like Allip or Shadow.

Uh, what? Ability damage heals at a baseline of 1 point per full night of rest to a single ability score. The only thing that heals hourly is nonlethal damage.

[Geddy2112]

The thing is, it's rare to be immune to entanglement. The penalties are fine(movement, -2 to hit/AC/reflex, -4 total to ranged atks, Concentration checks for casters...) and you'll notice there's something that affects everyone there.

This. A lot of debuff conditions are more powerful, but a large amount of enemies are flat out immune or so resistant. Likewise, other debuffs are only good against certain targets(forcing concentration does nothing to a martial character). Entangled is useful against almost everything and very few things are immune. Most big brutes are also weak in the reflex save department and dex scores, making them prime targets for entanglement that allows a save.

[Rijan_Sai]

You know, reading this thread got me thinking about something... (all upcoming links* to the PFSRD, though the elements are basically the same in 3.5)

The infamous Freedom of Movement (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/f/freedom-of-movement/) spell! This oft-touted (and admittedly powerful) spell pretty much negates almost everything spoken of so far.

So I read it:


...even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement...
(Emphasis added)

So I thought, (aren't there some forms of non-magical entanglement?) Yes, yes there are!
Enter the humble Net (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/weapons/weapon-descriptions/net) (and it's big brother Snag Net (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/weapons/weapon-descriptions/net-snag)) and the Tanglefoot Bag (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/goods-and-services/alchemical-creations/#TOC-Tanglefoot-Bag). Now, technically the TfB is an alchemical item (I think... doesn't it require Craft: Alchemy to make?) but it is still considered non-magical!

So, this got me thinking again:
What about a hallway trap: some sort of repeater canon, loaded with 5-6 Tanglefoot Bags. The targeting system (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/traps-hazards-and-special-terrains/traps/) (read: Trigger) detects intruders, and fires a bag at the source. Have several of these lining a hallway, to ensure full coverage. (May need to find a way to increase the effective time for the Tanglefoot goo, or there may be other substances I'm not familiar with that would work the same way.)

(*except this one)
An example of this in action (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK_OKGELcn0) (starts at 2:11... I know there is a way to direct the link to a specific time-frame, but I have no idea how to do it...)

[Psyren]

You know, reading this thread got me thinking about something... (all upcoming links* to the PFSRD, though the elements are basically the same in 3.5)

The infamous Freedom of Movement (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/f/freedom-of-movement/) spell! This oft-touted (and admittedly powerful) spell pretty much negates almost everything spoken of so far.

So I read it:


(Emphasis added)

So I thought, (aren't there some forms of non-magical entanglement?) Yes, yes there are!

The problem with your reading is that it isn't the only one; FoM says "even under." which could mean that it is inclusive of magic effects, rather than being exclusive only to magic effects. Debate has raged on this one for years.

[RoboEmperor]

I often come across the forums and many people suggest taking feats like Rime Spell when playing a wizard or a witch they say entangling is one the better debuffs in the game. Why is that? All I'm seeing is that there movement is slowed , they suffer -2 to hit and a -4 to Dex . Is there anything else?

In d&d, debuffs and buffs > direct damage.

Early levels it's like a 60/40 chance for a fighter to hit something. This boosts it to like 70. That's why using Summon Monster II to summon spiders and webbing everyone while flanking them is better than summoning dogs to attack NPCs with.

Crippled move speed also means you can choose to take them on one at a time.

So you made the 6v6 fight into a 6v1 fight x6, you significantly increased the chance to hit allowing you to kill them in one turn, and when they attack you they miss more, so this level 1 spell increased both your offense and defense drastically in a large AoE.

[CharonsHelper]

That has pretty much taken the sting of monsters like Allip or Shadow.

They're still mean, but not AS bad. It's nice to be hit by a Shadow and not suddenly have your full plate be so heavy that you collapse to the ground.

[Psyren]

They're still mean, but not AS bad. It's nice to be hit by a Shadow and not suddenly have your full plate be so heavy that you collapse to the ground.

I'm pretty sure that would still happen. Carrying Capacity is "a statistic based on the ability" (your Strength score.)

[Zangief1983]

Thanks for all the great replies, I see I definitely should take Rime spell.

[CharonsHelper]

I'm pretty sure that would still happen. Carrying Capacity is "a statistic based on the ability" (your Strength score.)

Nope. STR damage doesn't affect encumbrance in Pathfinder. That's one of the pretty subtle but very significant changes from 3.5 to Pathfinder.


For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability. If the amount of ability damage you have taken equals or exceeds your ability score, you immediately fall unconscious until the damage is less than your ability score. The only exception to this is your Constitution score. If the damage to your Constitution is equal to or greater than your Constitution score, you die. Unless otherwise noted, damage to your ability scores is healed at the rate of 1 per day to each ability score that has been damaged. Ability damage can be healed through the use of spells, such as lesser restoration.

and for STR damage specifically


Strength: Damage to your Strength score causes you to take penalties on Strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls, and weapon damage rolls (if they rely on Strength). The penalty also applies to your Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Small or larger) and your Combat Maneuver Defense. A character with a Strength score of 0 is too weak to move in any way and is unconscious. Some creatures do not possess a Strength score and have no modifier at all to Strength-based skills or checks.

That's it. No encumbrance mentioned.

[Psyren]

Nope. STR damage doesn't affect encumbrance in Pathfinder. That's one of the pretty subtle but very significant changes from 3.5 to Pathfinder.



and for STR damage specifically



That's it. No encumbrance mentioned.

Your first quote is precisely the one I mean. When it says "statistic based on the ability" it means that you take the modified ability into account when you look up your encumbrance on the table. Carrying Capacity is explicitly found in the "Vital Statistics" section (CRB 168-169).


Vital Statistics
...
Carrying Capacity
...
Encumbrance by Weight: If you want to determine whether your character’s gear is heavy enough to slow him down more than his armor already does, total the weight of all the character’s items, including armor, weapons, and gear (see appropriate tables in Chapter 6). Compare this total to the character’s Strength on Table 7–4.

There was also a FAQ that clarified the reverse of this, dealing with Temporary Strength Boosts. (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9rbg) Those apply to all uses of Strength like permanent ones do, they were just short on space. Penalties and damage should be treated the same way.

[CharonsHelper]

Your first quote is precisely the one I mean. When it says "statistic based on the ability" it means that you take the modified ability into account when you look up your encumbrance on the table. Carrying Capacity is explicitly found in the "Vital Statistics" section (CRB 168-169).



There was also a FAQ that clarified the reverse of this, dealing with Temporary Strength Boosts. (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9rbg) Those apply to all uses of Strength like permanent ones do, they were just short on space. Penalties and damage should be treated the same way.

Neither of those really matter because the core rules specifically call out what happens when you take STR damage (my last quote above) and it doesn't mention encumbrance.

[Psyren]

Neither of those really matter because the core rules specifically call out what happens when you take STR damage (my last quote above) and it doesn't mention encumbrance.

The rules say "statistics." I did not invent that word, they did.

I'm starting to wonder if you're reading my posts :smallannoyed:

[CharonsHelper]

The rules say "statistics." I did not invent that word, they did.

I'm starting to wonder if you're reading my posts :smallannoyed:

They never mention "statistics" at all in the rules section specifically talking about what happens when you take STR damage - so it doesn't matter.

You're trying to guess at what a general rule means and apply it to the specific when the specific rules are already spelled out.

[BWR]

And this is where RAW should be irrelevant because anyone with half a brain can guess what happens when you are suddenly too weak to carry your stuff.
It makes zero sense to say you are too weak to wield your weapons effectively but are somehow still capable of hauling around half a ton of gear.

[CharonsHelper]

And this is where RAW should be irrelevant because anyone with half a brain can guess what happens when you are suddenly too weak to carry your stuff.
It makes zero sense to say you are too weak to wield your weapons effectively but are somehow still capable of hauling around half a ton of gear.

It was done intentionally in Pathfinder, because no one wants the headache of re-running their encumbrance every round etc.

Just another simplification which they did intentionally.

There are a LOT of things which "make zero sense" but that is 100% the way they work in D&D or Pathfinder.

[Psyren]

They never mention "statistics" at all in the rules section specifically talking about what happens when you take STR damage - so it doesn't matter.

You're trying to guess at what a general rule means and apply it to the specific when the specific rules are already spelled out.

There is no "rules section." It is all rules. Carrying Capacity is a statistic, per the rules.

I've found a quote from SKR (http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kdks&page=2?Re-Channel-energy-and-charisma#82) stating it was meant to apply to carrying capacity. I don't think it's as difficult to recalculate as you believe, half of us are using electronic sheets these days. To me, it's worth it to avoid the huge incongruity when a fighter gets reduced to 1 by a Shadow so that he hits like a feather but can still run a mile in his chainmail while carrying his tower shield. When you can literally do more damage with your mace by lifting it over something's head and dropping it on them than you can by swinging it, you know that you're dealing with a silly ruling.

[Florian]

Ah, SKR in his usual self-defeating way. The main point of reworking how ability damage works is to avoid recalculating anything beyond applying the penalties. Yes, recalculating carrying capacity seems like the "realistic" thing to do, that that in turn means going down the rabid hole to do the same to other things that might seem "realistic". Then we could toss the whole thing and use the old ability damage rules again.

[CharonsHelper]

To me, it's worth it to avoid the huge incongruity when a fighter gets reduced to 1 by a Shadow so that he hits like a feather but can still run a mile in his chainmail while carrying his tower shield. When you can literally do more damage with your mace by lifting it over something's head and dropping it on them than you can by swinging it, you know that you're dealing with a silly ruling.

That's fine. You can houserule it. I'm not going to judge you as a bad person. But your taste doesn't change what the rule actually is.

But if you have issues with incongruity, you really shouldn't be playing Pathfinder at all. It's chock full of them if you look closely at all.

[Psyren]

That's fine. You can houserule it. I'm not going to judge you as a bad person. But your taste doesn't change what the rule actually is.

But if you have issues with incongruity, you really shouldn't be playing Pathfinder at all. It's chock full of them if you look closely at all.

Your attempt at condescension aside, you're the one who opened the door to "intention." (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?531567-(PF)-Why-is-entangling-the-opponent-considered-a-strong-debuff&p=22250836&viewfull=1#post22250836) Developer intent, since you brought it up, has been to reduce incongruity over time. For example, this FAQ (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9rbg) that says you shouldn't read entries so literally because they were tight on space, so you should apply common sense (which apparently isn't that common) instead.

And again, you're talking intent, but I'm the one with a dev quote backing up my reading, which you have yet to refute.

[CharonsHelper]

Your attempt at condescension aside, you're the one who opened the door to "intention." (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?531567-(PF)-Why-is-entangling-the-opponent-considered-a-strong-debuff&p=22250836&viewfull=1#post22250836)

I in no way meant that as proof - simply explanation of the difference.


Developer intent, since you brought it up, has been to reduce incongruity over time. For example, this FAQ (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9rbg) that says you shouldn't read entries so literally because they were tight on space, so you should apply common sense (which apparently isn't that common) instead.

Bonus =/= penalty. And they're talking about extrapolation.


And again, you're talking intent, but I'm the one with a dev quote backing up my reading, which you have yet to refute.

In the quote you gave - SKR practically said that RAW is my way, he just wasn't a big fan of it.

I have no idea why this is even an issue. The rules spell out exactly what happens in the specific case of STR damage with a list of penalties. Encumbrance is not amongst them.

[Psyren]

Bonus =/= penalty. And they're talking about extrapolation.

Bonuses and penalties are merely two sides of the same coin.


In the quote you gave - SKR practically said that RAW is my way, he just wasn't a big fan of it.

He said no such thing.



I have no idea why this is even an issue. The rules spell out exactly what happens in the specific case of STR damage with a list of penalties. Encumbrance is not amongst them.

"Statistics" is, and as I quoted above, Carrying Capacity is a statistic.

[CharonsHelper]

"Statistics" is, and as I quoted above, Carrying Capacity is a statistic.

No. No it wasn't. The word "statistics" is not listed under STR damage.

You quoted the general rule.

I quoted the specific.

Specific > general.

[Psyren]

No. No it wasn't. The word "statistics" is not listed under STR damage.

You quoted the general rule.

I quoted the specific.

Specific > general.

That only applies when two rules contradict. The general rule of "all ability score damage works like this" is not contradicted by the list of things in the Strength damage entry.