Simple Q&A (By RAW) VII [D&D 3.5e and all other games]

[Frosty]

A233
That little detail is hidden away in the Monster Manual glossary on page 312 under Movement Modes. A creature with a fly speed can move through the air at the indicated speed if carrying no more than a light load. (Note that medium armor does not necessarily constitute a medium load.) (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#fly)

Flight under a medium or heavy load is not generally possible, but armor does not appear to have any effect other than having its weight count towards the light load limit. If you have enough strength to wear full plate as a light load, you can fly unhindered even though it is heavy armor.

Terrific. And the next question becomes...

A234: While wearing heavy armor, your land speed is reduced to approximately 2/3 of normal. Does this apply to fly speed as well? I assume not, since there are no rules detailing that.

[Douglas]

A234
The chart and the text that goes along with it for speed reduction by armor makes no mention of the reduction being restricted to any particular type of speed, land or otherwise. There is mention of special treatment for a dwarf's land speed, but that is because the dwarf's special immunity to speed reduction from encumbrance is specific to their land speed.

Therefore, the speed reduction for heavy armor does apply to fly speeds and the "unhindered" part of my previous post is not entirely accurate.

[UglyPanda]

Q. 235 At even levels for a crusader, can I swap out maneuvers that are used as prerequisites for better maneuvers or do I always have to have at least one level 1 or 2 maneuver of each discipline I wish to use?

[Frosty]

A 235 There is no need to have a level 1 or level 2 maneuver. As long as you have enough maneuvers from that school. For example, if I have a level 3, level 4, and level 5 maneuver from the Iron Heart discipline, and I wanted to switch out one of my maneuvers for a level 7 maneuver that requires 3 Iron Heart maneuvers, I can lose my level 3 IH maneuver and learn the level 3 maneuver and everything will be fine, because after the switch, I still have 3 maneuvers from the Iron Heart discipline.

[NobleSavage]

Q. 236

Can TOB Strike Maneuvers with a range of "Melee Attack" be combined with a charge attack?

[Shhalahr Windrider]

A 236

No. A strike maneuver is a specific standard action that includes a normal attack. It is not an attack itself.

Likewise, a charge is a specific full-round action that includes a normal attack. This precludes the use of maneuvers or other standard actions.

(Wow, been a while since I ducked in here…)

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 236

It depends on the initiation action required to use the maneuver.
If the action required is a move, standard or full-round action you cannot initiate the maneuver and then make a charge. Even if you had an extra action most maneuvers won't benefit from it since you cannot take such an action in the middle of a charge.

EDIT: Yet, you timed it perfectly to ninja my return:-p

[NobleSavage]

Q. 237

A.
Does the 'Collector of Stories' skill trick from Complete Scoundrel include the Archivist's Dark Knowledge ability?

B.
Does 'Collector of Stories,' once taken, work for all Knowledge skills, or must it be taken for each individual skill?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 237

A

Strictly speaking no, but they do seem to fit together nicely.

B

Yes.

[monty]

B

Yes.

The intent of your answer is pretty clear, but you did say "yes" to an "or" question

[NobleSavage]

Eh, not clear enough, it would seem. I'd appreciate a clarification on A. 237

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Eh, not clear enough, it would seem. I'd appreciate a clarification on A. 237

It works for all and need not be taken for each individually.


The intent of your answer is pretty clear, but you did say "yes" to an "or" question

Apparently I stop reading as soon as I understand the question or maybe the minions brought fresh popcorn... Who knows. I do apologize of course. :smallredface:

[Alveanerle]

Q. 238
Warlock Incorporated

A.
Can Warlock use the "Quicken Spell-like Ability" feat (source: Monster Manual) to use quickened eldritch blast?

B.
If A. is ok, can Warlock mix different "xxx spell-like ability" feats? For example, could he (providing he has feats required), cast Empowered Maximized Quickened eldritch blast?

C.
If A. is ok, could Warlock mix in his eldritch essences and blast shapes to such a quickened eldritch blast?

Q. 239
Time Management

From what i gather movement-type actions can be performed using standard actions. Does the same apply to swift actions? For example, could one perform his swift action in a given round, and then use his movement or standard actions to gain second usage of a swift action in a round?

Q. 240
Mounted Wierdness
Can mount be considered self-mounted? In other words, would it be possible for a dragon to take the spirited charge feat and then go wreak havoc on the PC group, picking them off one by one with a spirited charge?

[Alveanerle]

Q. 241
Empowered Maximize

A. Assuming a dummy spell does XdY damage, what would be its damage after empowering and maximizing it? X*Y*1.5 or X*Y+(XdY)*0.5?

B. The same question repeated for a dummy spell-like ability dealing XdY damage - would it end up doing X*Y*1.5 or X*Y+(XdY)*0.5?

Short explanation for the question. All the time i believed the first method is supposed to be used for both those cases. However, recently someone came up with the notion that he found it somewhere in the sourcebooks that the other method is to be used for Spell-Like Abilities. I now want to confirm what's the RAW on it.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 238

Yes.

A. 239

No.

A. 240

No. To benefit from the feat the dragon would have to ride something else.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 241

X*Y+(XdY)*0.5 for both.

This is stated in the description of both maximize effects in the PHB and Complete Arcane, respectively.

[nargbop]

Question 242

This has probably been answered before, but I don't know how to phrase the search.

There's at least one method of increasing the benefits from Owl's Wisdom, Bear's Endurance, etc. , from +4 to +6. I can't remember any of the methods. Does anybody know?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 242

Nothing comes to mind, but in 3.0 you could empower it to receive 1d4 x 1.5.

[Swooper]

Q243
Iron Ward Diamonds from the MIC are armour augmentation crystals that grant DR 1/-, 3/- or 5/- depending on the grade of the crystal, but only until they have resisted 10, 30 or 50 points of damage that day, respectively. The description specifically states that they stack with similar DR, such as that from a suit of adamantine armour or a barbarian's class ability. My question is, which DR comes first, for the purposes of counting points resisted by the Iron Ward Diamond? In case this is unclear, let me use an example:

A character wears an Adamantine Breastplate +1, granting DR 2/-. He attaches a Lesser Iron Ward Diamond to it, which adds DR 3/- to that until the Diamond has resisted 30 points of damage that day. He takes four points of damage from an arrow, which is fully resisted by his DR 5/-. Does he mark 3 points off today's IWD DR pool, or only two?

Whatever the answer, does the same apply to Stoneskin and other sources of temporary DR?

[Douglas]

A238 more detailed
Yes to all, however each of these feats has a minimum caster level required to use with a SLA of each level. For example, Quicken SLA used with a 5th level SLA requires caster level 18. An unaltered Eldritch Blast is considered level 1 as per the errata for Complete Arcane. If an essence or shape invocation or both are used, it is considered to be whatever level the higher invocation is equivalent to. So, you could use a Quickened Eldritch Blast at caster level 10, but a Quickened Sickening Blast would require caster level 12, an Eldritch Cone can't be quickened without caster level 18, and an Utterdark Doom can never be quickened normally*.

The caster level limit is not cumulative on SLA metamagic feats, however, so you could pile on all of Maximize, Empower, and Quicken to the same Eldritch Blast the instant you satisfy the caster level requirement for each.

*Extending the table into epic would allow applying Quicken SLA to Utterdark Blast, Eldritch Doom, and even their combination at caster level 24.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 243

I do not have the specific descriptions in front of me, but generally when there is no order application specified you use the most beneficial.
In this case you would subtract from the armor before counting against the the crystal limit.

[Frosty]

A. 240

No. To benefit from the feat the dragon would have to ride something else.

Do you think it would make sense to houserule that Centaurs automatically qualify to take mounted feats, since they basically are a human torso mounted on a horse's body?

[Chronos]

A 242 continued: There's a feat somewhere that increases the benefit of every spell you cast which increases ability scores... But unfortunately I can't remember what it's called.



Q 244: Does concentrating on a hostile spell count as an "attack", for purposes of the Invisibility spell? For instance, I cast a Wall of Fire spell, and concentrate on it. While I'm concentrating, an ally casts Invisibility on me. Does the Invisibility get disrupted?

[Curmudgeon]

A 244

It's certainly an attack if someone takes damage. As an immobile effect, Invisibility won't fail until that happens.
For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe.

[nargbop]

A. 242 Found one. It's a feat in Dragon Magazine 325 page 77 called Ability Enhancer. It improves any Transmutation spell I cast which provides an enhancement bonus to an ability by +2. Bull's Strength gives +6 with this feat.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Do you think it would make sense to houserule that Centaurs automatically qualify to take mounted feats, since they basically are a human torso mounted on a horse's body?

Yes indeed, I even think Races of the Wild mentioned something to that effect, but I am not sure if it was for all purposes.

[Demons_eye]

Q:245 What book page number is these paragon levels you can take.

[Chronos]

A 245: Unearthed Arcana. I don't know the page number, but they're available freely online (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/racialParagonClasses.htm).

[Lord Mika]

Q 246 4th edition faerun player's guide Shyran Cataclysm in swordmage paregon paths. does this ability do 5d8 + INT MOD of fire,cold,thunder,electricity, and acid seperatly or all together. power lever = ??? :smallfurious::smallconfused:

[TylerFerretLord]

Q247
If something with the Paragon template is a Druid and wildshapes, does it wildshape into a paragon creature or just a normal one?

[RTGoodman]

A 247

It would change into a normal version of the creature.

Wild shape (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#wildShape), in it's most recent version, functions like alternate form. Alternate form (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#alternateForm) explicitly states "A creature cannot use alternate form to take the form of a creature with a template."

[Vandin]

Q. 248

I swear there's a rule somewhere for giving up Turn Undead uses to gain additional uses of domain granted powers. Am I crazy? If not, where is it actually spelled out at?

[BizzaroStormy]

A. 248

The Evangelist variant class give you addition domains but does not grant additional use of powers.

[AmberVael]

Q. 249

On page 34 of Complete Divine, it is stated that the spell list for a Divine Crusader is limited to a single domain.
The phrasing they use in the section of "Spells Per Day" brings up the following question in my mind:

Is it actually possible to increase the number of spells on a Divine Crusader's spell list by use of feats (such as Extra Spell), Prestige Classes (Such as classes that allow access to an extra Domain), or other sources?

[Chronos]

A 248 continued: You may be thinking of the Devotion feats, which may be taken as normal feats or in place of normal granted powers. Each one lets you do something a limited number of times per day, or more often if you spend turnings. It wouldn't make sense to have such a rule for the normal domain powers, since some of them don't even have uses per day.



Q250: Can a specialist wizard with the Necromancy school barred become a lich? I think the answer is no, but I'm having a hard time finding support for that.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 250

There is no such limitation.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 249

Yes, such feats exist to break the general rules as long as you meet the prerequisites.

[Douglas]

A249 nitpick
In the specific case of the Extra Spell feat, it is unclear on the basis of RAW alone whether the chosen spell can be from outside your class list. However, the FAQ is quite explicit that it is limited to your class list, and going by that ruling would make the feat useless for Divine Crusaders.

Other means that do ignore class list limitations, such as picking up more domains from Contemplative, would work however.

[AmberVael]

A249 nitpick
In the specific case of the Extra Spell feat, it is unclear on the basis of RAW alone whether the chosen spell can be from outside your class list. However, the FAQ is quite explicit that it is limited to your class list, and going by that ruling would make the feat useless for Divine Crusaders.

Oh. Dur. That just completely slipped my mind. There are other ways though.

[Fishy]

Q251

The Intimidating Strike feat from PH2 explicitly cannot be used to make a foe more than shaken. But if I were to apply an Intimidating strike and then, later in the encounter, another Demoralize attempt or Frightful Presence effect, would they jump from Shaken to Frightened?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 251

Yes, you can use other means to worsen the opponent's fear condition after you have used the feat.

[Ketsueki]

Q:252


I'm going NUTS here. I swear that there is a spell in the players that increases Crit range, but i cannot for the the life of me find it. Anyone if I'm crazy, or if I'm not and the name of the spell?

[BizzaroStormy]

A 252

Yeah...the Keen Edge Spell.

[Darth Waiter]

Q. 253

I'm about to start playing an Eberron campaign as a warforged artificer; I'll have adamantine armor but I'd love to be able to enchant myself, a bit here, a bit there, as if I were wearing separate items. Are there any on/off-line referrences that will allow me to make a good case for such enchanting with my DM?

[Dziadek]

Q.254

What are the rules in D&D 3.5 for the situation when a character hits another person in the head in purpose of knocking him out instantly but not killing him?

[BizzaroStormy]

A254

That would be nonlethal damage. In comes with a -4 penalty on the attack roll.

[Dziadek]

A254

That would be nonlethal damage. In comes with a -4 penalty on the attack roll.

Q. 254b

Doesn't aiming for the head somehow make knocking out easier? I mean, it is still possible to knock a person unconsious with nonlethal damage when you aren't aiming for a certain spot. Isn't there a rule when you aim at the head? Like when you aim for the limbs, enemy gets penalities when using them?

[monty]

A 354b

I believe 3.0 had something along those lines with Called Shot, but I can't think of any 3.5 equivalent.

[Douglas]

A254b
Not by RAW. In 3.x RAW there is no such thing as a called shot or attack on a specific body part in general. Certain creatures, such as hydras, have special rules along those lines and some feats or special abilities may give combat options meant to represent such tactics, but that's all.

The closest thing I can think of to what you want that doesn't require a specific build option is doing a coup de grace for nonlethal damage, and by RAW I think that would risk killing the target by the save-or-die. It would be quite reasonable to house rule that failing the save against such an attack only results in unconsciousness rather than death, however.

[Dziadek]

A254b
Not by RAW. In 3.x RAW there is no such thing as a called shot or attack on a specific body part in general. Certain creatures, such as hydras, have special rules along those lines and some feats or special abilities may give combat options meant to represent such tactics, but that's all.

The closest thing I can think of to what you want that doesn't require a specific build option is doing a coup de grace for nonlethal damage, and by RAW I think that would risk killing the target by the save-or-die. It would be quite reasonable to house rule that failing the save against such an attack only results in unconsciousness rather than death, however.

thanks a lot

[SoD]

Q. 255, on racial bonuses.

Do they stack? E.G: halfling: +2 move silently, vampire: +8 move silently, halfling vampire: +10, or merely +8?

I think they should, but can't find a specific rule stating they do.

[Talic]

A: 255 Typed bonuses don't stack, unless the text specifically states otherwise. The racial bonus type has no such text (example of a typed bonus that does is a dodge bonus). Thus, Racial Bonuses do not stack.

[Obahai]

Which D&D 3.5 book has the information for starting gold for higher level characters?

[monty]

Which D&D 3.5 book has the information for starting gold for higher level characters?

A 256 (please number your questions)

Dungeon Master's Guide, page 135.

[Waspinator]

Q 257:

Silly question time. By RAW, can a Kobold Warblade use Iron Heart Surge against the sun and if so, what happens?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 257

The wording and interpretations are so poor that you should probably allow that.

[Waspinator]

257:

Yeah, that's one of the couple bits of the Tome of Battle that is really out of line. Most of that book's a pretty neat and reasonably melee system. It's just the "get out of ANY one negative thing" button that gets silly because technically, since kobolds get affected negatively by the sun, they should be able to use the Surge against it and put it out. Which is ridiculous. That is one maneuver that I think could use a homebrew fix/replacement.....

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 257 Continued

Well the sun arguably is not an effect, so this would be a condition removed and thus not ending the sun.

You knew the question was silly, so my original answer was also based on the same level of seriousness, but that in no way removes the probably with the wording that suggest that the effect is ended.

It is a very easy fix, however, just rule that it is the effect of the effect that is ended thus effectively making IHS a personal only effect.

[Jastermereel]

Q 258.

A friend of mine wants to play a Medusa as detailed in Savage Species. Once the progression is complete, how does the Petrifying Gaze work? They claim that once it fully matures, it effectively shifts from being an active ability ("I try to turn target A into stone") to a passive ability ("If you're within 30' of me and not my friend, make a save"). Is this true (or can it be achieved with feats)?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 258

It has automatic effects and can be used actively also.
The relevant rules are outlined in the description of gaze attacks in the MM, the description under the Medusa is only an abbreviation (although with some significant details).

[Vandin]

Q. 259
Beholder Eye Rays: The target must succeed on a X save or be affected as though by the spell.

Does that mean they get one save to resist the ray effect, and one save to resist the spell, and thus two saves in total? It seems a bit confusing, especially since they detailed the effect of a successful save for Finger of Death, but not for Disintegrate.

Edit: Sneaking a microquestion in. Does the main, anti-magic ray focus on one direction, or does it follow a specific target? Agh! Ninja'd by the Beholder Lord himself!

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Q. 259
Beholder Eye Rays: The target must succeed on a X save or be affected as though by the spell.

Does that mean they get one save to resist the ray effect, and one save to resist the spell, and thus two saves in total? It seems a bit confusing, especially since they detailed the effect of a successful save for Finger of Death, but not for Disintegrate.

A. 259

No, you only get one save as if the spell were cast on you.

[Douglas]

A257
IHS can end one spell, effect, or condition that is affecting the user. The sun is not a spell or condition. I haven't been able to figure out a clear formal definition of effect that satisfies me, but the sun is definitely not one by any definition I would accept. Therefore, the sun is not a valid target of IHS.

The kobold could use IHS to end the dazzled condition, but how this works when the cause of that condition is still present is not explained.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

A 259 micro

The antimagic cone is a standard cone area of effect. Like other lasting cone effects, such as detect magic, the user simply choses a direction to point it each round, and that is the area it affects.

[BizzaroStormy]

Q 260 D20 Modern

Is there an online SRD for D20 modern?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 260

Here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/msrd) is the official.

With google you can find others that you may find easier to use.

[DementedFellow]

Q. 261


My friend tells me that somewhere in the PHB or the DMG in 3.0 or 3.5, it says that if you have Craft Wondrous Item and Brew Potion then you can make potions of spells above 3rd level. Is this true and where is it?

Thanks in advance.

[Jastermereel]

Q 262.

Do templates that change based on the number of hitdice (Savage Species' "Feral" for example) get fixed in place when applied or do they change as the character gain's HD?

That is, if someone plays a Feral Magmin, for example, with two HD and takes Feral (in the building process) they'd gain Improved Grab, but none of the higher special attacks. As they level up, will the effects stay static or would they gain Pounce, Rend and Rake as they acquire the apropriate HD?

P.S. While Feral may apply only to racial HD, the question is meant more generally.

[Xenogears]

A262 Never read an official ruling on it but based on some of the examples they give for tlates I would say yes. The woodling template for example. It gives spell-like abilities based on HD. The example is a human with druid levels. They have spell-like abilities equal to the HD from Class Levels. So it seems likely that as you level up you gain new abilities.

[monty]

A 261

No, that is not true, unless there's some obscure ability I don't know about.

From the SRD:

It can duplicate the effect of a spell of up to 3rd level that has a casting time of less than 1 minute.

[Thurbane]

A. 261 cont.

Your friend may be thinking of Elixirs (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/magicItemsWI.html#elixir-of-fire-breath), which follow the rules of Craft Wondrous Item rather than Brew Potion.

[ocato]

Q263

Would an Ardent who took levels in a prestige Class that grants advanced manifesting gain access to new mantles as he leveled up?

Presumably this isn't cut and dry as "no advancing class features" because the Ardent's acquisition of new powers is heavily reliant on acquiring new mantles to get powers from, however I can understand the argument both ways.

[Eternal Kanus]

Q264

Would a Warshaper be eligible for Improved Natural Attack? If so, would it just be for one type of natural weapon or would it be just for one type of natural weapon (claws, horns, etc.)?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

A 265

The Warshaper would be eligible for Improved Natural Attack, but it would only apply to one type of attack. So if he chose INA:Claws, whenever he had claws, he would increase the damage by one step. However, if he chose to grow a bite, the size would not be increased.

[ColdSepp]

Q. 265

Can a monk use flurry of blows while grabbing? The page with the ruling would help, if it is in the FAQ, as I thought.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Q. 265

Can a monk use flurry of blows while grabbing? The page with the ruling would help, if it is in the FAQ, as I thought.

A. 265

By a strict reading you cannot benefit from such extra attacks as your grapple attempts are derived from you BAB rather than the number of attacks you can make.

However, I seems like a very reasonable house rule and perhaps even something that would be encouraged under RAI.

If you want to study the question further there has been a few threads that included this topic and they can be found through the search function.

[Lossarim]

Q 266:

Concerning immediate actions.
Which actions take priorty in taking effect first?
If some one casts an immediate action spell after i declare my standard action spell, which spell would take effect first?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 266

The immediate action takes priority.

Think of it in the same way readied actions happen before the action that triggers them.

[Ryuuk]

Q 267

How much would a large weapon made of a special material cost? Would the +3000 from adding admantine also be doubled?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 267

Any additional price expressed as + X, like in your adamantine example, would not be doubled, but any thing that says double the price of the normal weapon, such as for example cold iron, would have the special material cost factored in when calculating the cost based on size.

[Ponce]

Q268

If you have something like lingering song, could you use it to have multiple song effects working at once? If so, could you also have Inspire Courage and Dragonfire Inspiration working in unison for a total of +x to attack, +x to damage, and +xd6 elemental to damage?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 268

Yes.

(A note for other than the above mentioned combinations; Always remember that spell and effects from the same source or granting bonuses of the same type usually do not stack)

[Lossarim]

Q 269
Okay, so an immediate action takes priority over standard actions, but does an immediate action take priority over another immediate action?
And, after using a standard, move or swift action can i use a immediate action in response to another immediate action?And which would take priority?
Argh, immediate actions give me headaches...

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 269

The rules could use some clarification. Some DM adjudication is needed when handling a sequential combat system that is used to model simultaneous actions...

However, it seems reasonable to use the LIFO (Last-In-First-Out) method in the case of immediate actions if it is vital to determine the exact sequence.

[NobleSavage]

Q. 270 Does the Tome of Battle stance 'Martial Spirit' grant its benefit (2 hp) on a successful touch attack?

Seems like it would, RAI if not RAW, as it is an inspiration boost due to a success.

[Alveanerle]

First of all, i love you all for all your help in this thread. Big Thank You to all You good souls out there, especially to the Popcorn Tyrant.

And now - next fistful of questions.:smallsmile:

Q. 271
Falling down and AoO
Does leaving the square due to falling down makes one provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening foes?

Q. 272
AM & Falling down
When a magical effect gets suppressed by the antimagic field, when exactly does the "suppression" start working? In other words, if i have a fly spell active and someone with antimagic field around him gets close to me, will i drop down out of the AM field right away or once my turn comes up?

Q. 273
TWF & many hands
How do two-weapon fighting tree feats work with many-handed characters? In other words - if a marilith would pick a TWF feat, how would his full attack routine change? And with Improved TWF?

Q. 274
Distance modifiers to checks
What would be difficulty modifiers to spellcraft check for recognizing spell being cast by a fine opponent in a 50ft distance?

What would be the spot check required to even see a fine opponent from a 50ft distance?

And for a diminutive one?

Q. 275
Dragons & respiratory issues
If a dragon uses his breath weapon, and on the "check when you can do it again" 1d4 roll it rolls "1", does it mean it can use his breath weapon right away on the next round, or there need to be one round between breathes.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

A 271

If one would actually fall out of their occupied square, yes. However, in most ground-based combat, simply falling to the ground would not change your square, and therefore, would not provoke.


A 272

It will be surpressed as soon as the fly effect intersects with the antimagic effect. In your scenario, you would drop on your opponent's turn.


A 273

Multihanded creatures use Multiweapon Fighting (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/monsterFeats.html#multiweapon-fighting) in place of Two-Weapon Fighting.

There are descriptions for Improved and Greater Mutiweapon Fighting, which grant extra attacks with all off hands in Savage Species. I am unsure if those feats have been updated in more recent material.


A 274

Although the rules allude to using Spot checks to detect creatures that are not hiding but may be difficult to see anyway, there are no hard DCs given.

However, a Spot check has a flat penalty of -1 per 10 ft. away, so any Spot check for something 50 ft. away automatically has a -5 penalty. I would recommend applying the creature's size modifier to hide checks in similar situations, too.


A 275

Effects are measured from the end of a character's turn until the beginning of their subsequent turns. So a one-round wait does actually mean that the dragon can breath right away on their next turn.

[monty]

Q 276

How do you determine caster level for the special abilities of an intelligent magic item?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 276

I think this part was left out of the rules.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 270

I am AFB, but I think the only qualifier is that you are making an attack.

[weenie]

Q. 277

What's the difference between hardness and DR?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 277

Hardness is for objects while DR is for creatures.

I am not sure what more you are looking for?

[Alveanerle]

Q 273 continued



A 273

Multihanded creatures use Multiweapon Fighting in place of Two-Weapon Fighting.

There are descriptions for Improved and Greater Mutiweapon Fighting, which grant extra attacks with all off hands in Savage Species. I am unsure if those feats have been updated in more recent material.


In other words - would taking 6 levels of ranger, along with two-weapon fighting feat tree (Improved TWF), change the number of scimitar attacks of a marilith demon?

Q. 278
Spontaneous Casting vs Metamagic

Can a sorcerer with Rapid Metamagic feat (Complete Mage) apply Quicken Spell metamagic feat to his spells?

I think yes, just want to make sure if it's right. The description of metamagic feats states that quicken cannot be used to spontanously cast spells, because adding metamagic to them increases their casting time. However, Rapid Metamagic states it clearly that the spellcaster possessing this feat uses the original casting times of spells - "the spell takes only its normal casting time".

Q. 279
Project image vs alternate form etc
If a caster of the project image spell has its form altered (either due to "Altenate Form" draconic feature, or due to Alter Self or other Polymorph family spells), does the projected image reflect his true self or its new form?

[Curmudgeon]

There are descriptions for Improved and Greater Mutiweapon Fighting, which grant extra attacks with all off hands in Savage Species. I am unsure if those feats have been updated in more recent material. According to the Online Feat Index (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats), the Savage Species feat descriptions are the most current.


What would be the spot check required to even see a fine opponent from a 50ft distance?

And for a diminutive one?
A 274 The DC to Spot a fine creature at 50' is 25. The DC to Spot a diminutive one at 50' is 21.

The rules for this are rather poorly organized. Start with the Difficulty Class Examples (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htm#difficultyClass) table at the start of the Skills chapter to see that Spotting something large in plain sight is DC 0. Then consult the Creature Size and Scale (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#bigandLittleCreatu resInCombat) table to see that the DC opposing Spot increases by 4 for each size smaller. Finally, see the Spot Check Penalties (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/spot.htm#spotCheckPenalties) table to see that the DC increases by 1 (OK, actually it's formulated as a -1 penalty to the roll) for each 10' of distance.

[Curmudgeon]

Q 273 continued

In other words - would taking 6 levels of ranger, along with two-weapon fighting feat tree (Improved TWF), change the number of scimitar attacks of a marilith demon? A 273 continued: No.

The Ranger's Combat Style class ability is specific to emulating Two-Weapon Fighting, and provides no benefit to Rangers with more than two hands.

You might convince a generous DM to allow substituting the Multiweapon Fighting feat tree as a house rule.

[Curmudgeon]

A 278 Yes.

Rapid Metamagic removes the extra casting time requirement for spontaneous spellcasters, so Quicken Spell becomes useable by them.

A 279
The projected image looks, sounds, and smells like you but is intangible. The spell makes no claim to present your original form, so it projects your current appearance.

[Alveanerle]

A 279 The spell makes no claim to present your original form, so it projects your current appearance.

And what would happen if someone would cast project image, and then use the shape altering ability? Would the image change to represent the "current" status?

[Riffington]

Q 280
What happens if multiple sources control the same undead?
For example, if a Wizard casts Control Undead, and a cleric uses Rebuke/Command Undead on the same target, do both work? Only one? Does it matter that the spell has a duration while the cleric power does not?

[Alveanerle]

Q 280
What happens if multiple sources control the same undead?
For example, if a Wizard casts Control Undead, and a cleric uses Rebuke/Command Undead on the same target, do both work? Only one? Does it matter that the spell has a duration while the cleric power does not?

Only one source can control one undead.

[Morbius]

Q. 281

A target of the charm person or charm monster spells will notice it was target of a spell when the duration ends or it will just think to himself why he did something so stupid?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 281

I do not think it is detailed, but from this part about making the save we know that such spells feel like a "hostile force". There are no mentioning in the spell description of amnesia or other side effects, so it seems reasonable to conclude that you are aware that your actions might very well be caused by a spell/magical effect, assuming you have knowledge about such concepts in the first place.


Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

[Curmudgeon]

And what would happen if someone would cast project image, and then use the shape altering ability? Would the image change to represent the "current" status? Yes, it would. The spell acts according to its description ("looks, sounds, and smells like you") for its duration.

[Chronos]

A 277 continued: There are a handful of creatures (mostly constructs) which have hardness, so the distinction isn't just creature/object. Practically speaking, the main difference is that hardness works against everything (except for a few special attacks and possibly adamantine), including energy damage, but DR usually has some type of weapon damage that bypasses it, and is always bypassed by elemental damage.

Also, since DR and hardness are two different abilities, if you manage to get both (Stoneskin cast on an animated object, for instance), they stack. Usually, two different sources of DR (or two different sources of hardness) would not stack, unless specified otherwise.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

A 273 Continued, Correction

The description for Multiweapon Fighting indicates that Multiweapon Fighting outright replaces Two-Weapon Fighting for creatures with more than two arms. This would indicate that any 3+ armed creature that is entitled to Two-Weapon Fighting recieves Multiweapon Fighting instead.

[Curmudgeon]

A 273 Continued, Correction

The description for Multiweapon Fighting indicates that Multiweapon Fighting outright replaces Two-Weapon Fighting for creatures with more than two arms. This would indicate that any 3+ armed creature that is entitled to Two-Weapon Fighting recieves Multiweapon Fighting instead. A 273 Continued -- Further Correction

As a Ranger, you don't actually get Two-Weapon Fighting; you get Combat Style, and that's limited to two specific options:

At 2nd level, a ranger must select one of two combat styles to pursue: archery or two-weapon combat. ... If the ranger selects two-weapon combat, he is treated as having the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat. This Ranger class feature will allow only the two listed choices; Combat Style doesn't have a multi-weapon combat option.

This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms. Strictly by RAW, you don't get further benefits for having more than two arms. You could, of course, try to convince your DM to stretch things past what the rules permit.

[monty]

A 273 Continued -- Further Correction

As a Ranger, you don't actually get Two-Weapon Fighting; you get Combat Style, and that's limited to two specific options:
This Ranger class feature will allow only the two listed choices; Combat Style doesn't have a multi-weapon combat option.
Strictly by RAW, you don't get further benefits for having more than two arms. You could, of course, try to convince your DM to stretch things past what the rules permit.

A 273 Continued - Further Correction Correction

However, Multiweapon Fighting says it replaces Two-Weapon Fighting for creatures with multiple arms. So, when you would be treated as having TWF for Combat Style, this is replaced by being treated as having MWF.

I'm thinking this should have its own thread, so we don't gum up the Q&A any more than we already have. I'll go make one now. Feel free to continue the arguments there.

[Demons_eye]

Q:282
Were is the feat Control Body found?

[Curmudgeon]

A 282

I don't know of any such feat, as it's not in the Online Feat Index (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats). Are you perhaps thinking of Mutable Body? That's in Races of Eberron on page 110.

[Douglas]

A282
No such feat exists in any WotC product to my knowledge. Perhaps you meant the psionic power (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/controlBody.htm)?

[Boo]

Reposted and edited a bit from other thread...

Q. 283

What would better compliment the Drunken Master PrC from Sword and Fist? An average Monk? Or a Ki Striking Monk (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Ki_Striking_Monk_(DnD_Class))?

(Note: Ki Striking Monk is a homebrew that I found on D&D Wiki.)

I'm guessing just a Monk, but maybe a KSM can be integrated to work just as well. I dunno.

@V: Hmm, maybe I'm just too tired to have realized that... Sorry again.

I never really like starting new threads. I'll just look them over a bit, and then I'll decide on what to do with it.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 283


This thread is for more rules oriented questions and less about opinions about drunk monks even if such things are sometimes voiced here.

I suggest you start a new thread (or continue in the other thread you are referring to, if suitable) to explore the question further.

[ChibiStacey]

Q #284

Can someone clarify how the Spellthief's Absorb Spell ability works? What would happen if you fail your level check to absorb the spell (bearing in mind you've already passed the save for the spell to be able to use your absorb spell ability)? In the rules it says you are affected by the spell 'normally'.

I see it like this:

Spellthief is the target of a spell
Spellthief passes the save
Spellthief fails the level check
Spellthief is affected by the spell as if they had passed the save (and does not absorb the spell)

However the wording is ambiguous so I may be getting it wrong (and I can't see any articles where it is clarified).

[Shhalahr Windrider]

A 284

Your interpretation would be correct.

The wording is indeed ambiguous, but various official FAQ entries tend to reinforce the notition that when the phrases like "the spell has its normal effects" is used, it refers to the normal effect as to whatever parameters it has already been subject to. In this way, there is a difference between a spell's "normal" effect and a spell's "full" effect.

In this case, the spell is already acting under the parameter of a successful save, so the spellthief is subject to the "normal effects" of the spell as they apply to a target that has succeeded its save. For a "Save Negates" spell, this means the spellthief suffers no effects at all.

[Fostire]

Q. 285 Does applying a metamagic feat to a spell increase the DC? for example does applying quicken spell increase the DC by 4 since the spell is now 4 levels higher?

Q. 286 Can spell like abilities be used to counterspell?
Q. 287 Can spell like abilities be counterspelled?

[Douglas]

A285
No, unless the metamagic feat in question is Heighten Spell.

A286 and 287
No to both. reference (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spellLikeAbilities)

[Fostire]

Q. 288 The standard strand of prayer beads in the dmg costs 25800 gp but it says that the price is reduced if some beads are missing so if I remove the bead of smiting (-16800 gp) and the bead of healing (-9000 gp) it would be...free? the errata doesn't clear that up

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 288

There is no RAW solution, it needs errata.

[Alveanerle]

Q. 289
Scorching ray vs sneak attacks

A. Assuming all conditions for the sneak attack are fulfilled, can each of the multiple rays of scorching ray spell score a sneak attack if each is fired at a different target?

B.And if all three rays are fired at a single target?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 289

Scorching ray is considered a volley type attack where only the first ray fired (regardless of number of targets) have the possibility of inflicting sneak attack damage.
This was clarified in Complete Arcane.

[Curmudgeon]

This was clarified in Complete Mage.
Make that Complete Arcane.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Make that Complete Arcane.

Indeed, thank you. I was wondering what was wrong with it after I had typed it. :smallsigh:

[Fostire]

Q. 290 What does the Ur priest (complete divine) use as divine focus? the entry doesn't mention anything and a holy symbol seems out of place with the fluff.

[Alveanerle]

Q. 291
hastened natural attacks

If a creature has only natural attacks, does it get any additional attacks while under the effect of a haste spell.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 291

Yes, one additional attack.

[Curmudgeon]

A 290

There is no RAW answer to this question. Ur-Priests steal divine spells, so I could suggest some options:
they could use stolen divine focuses;
craft their own non-holy focuses; or
cobble them together from bits of various stolen holy symbols.

A 291 Yes.

Attacks made using secondary natural weapons only add 1/2 the creature's STR bonus, as usual.

[Learnedguy]

Q. 292

Can I counterspell higher level spells by applying the Heighten Spell metamagic feat to a lower level spell? (Assuming I have Improved Counterspelling)

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 292

Yes, heighten increases the spell level.

[Demons_eye]

Q: 293

Dread necro dose not have to be evil, and at the end of 20 levels she becomes a lich. Can you make a good one by that logic?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

A 293
No. The relevent portion from the SRD:
The process of becoming a lich is unspeakably evil and can be undertaken only by a willing character. So while there is no 'Evil' requirement for the class, the capstone ability does require being Evil to get the benefits. Though I doubt any DM would actually enforce that, but RAW you do have to be Evil to be a standard Lich.

[Alveanerle]

A 293
No. The relevent portion from the SRD: So while there is no 'Evil' requirement for the class, the capstone ability does require being Evil to get the benefits. Though I doubt any DM would actually enforce that, but RAW you do have to be Evil to be a standard Lich.

Except for Faerun, where good aligned liches are known to exist (see Monsters of Faerun, page 90).

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Except for Faerun, where good aligned liches are known to exist (see Monsters of Faerun, page 90).Raw, though, it turns you into a Lich, not a Baelnorn or an Archlich. I said there was no way a sane DM would punish you for taking 20 levels in one class, but this is the RAW thread, not the 'Rules As Anyone With Half A Brain Would Interpret Them' thread.

[Saph]

Q. 294

What's the CL on the holy word effect caused by the roar of a Leonal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/leonal.htm)?

For some (Su) abilities the CL doesn't matter much, but for an effect like Holy Word, the exact caster level is pretty important!

- Saph

Edit: Cool. Thanks.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

A. 294
Caster Level 12. The relevant text:
Supernatural Abilities (Su)

Supernatural abilities are magical and go away in an antimagic field but are not subject to spell resistance, counterspells, or to being dispelled by dispel magic...Unless otherwise noted, a supernatural ability has an effective caster level equal to the creature’s Hit Dice.

[Divinech]

I've got some warlock related questions:

Q 295
Let's assume I take "Craft Wondrous Item"-Feat at 6th level.
Does a warlock have a caster level to create magic items, even though he is no spellcaster? If yes, can he provide the spell via a scroll and UMD?

Q 296
The spell-like abilities of the warlock need simple somatic components. But can he use the invocation "flee the scene" while grappling? It works as the spell "dimension door", which doesn't require somatic components.

Q 297
Generally spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, but can a warlock use his "voracious dispelling" invocation to counterspell just like the spell "dispel magic"?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 295

Yes, the caster level is also what allows the warlock to take the feat in the first place.

A. 296

Strictly speaking no, but going by RAI it should probably be allowed.

A. 297

Yes.

[Curmudgeon]

A 295 Yes and yes.

According to Complete Arcane page 72:
For feats or prestige classes requiring a minimum caster level, creatures that use spell-like abilities or invocations instead of spells use either their fixed caster level or their class level to determine qualifications. The Warlock can utilize Use Magic Device to provide the necessary spell(s) for Craft Wondrous Item.

A 296

There isn't a RAW answer to this one. The Complete Arcane text says both that the Warlock's invocations use somatic components, and that they function like the spells they emulate. There's no clarification of how much they function like those spells. It's the DM's call as to whether invocations mimicking spells without somatic components actually have somatic components.

A 297 No.

The general rule is that spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell. There is no exception noted for Voracious Dispelling.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 297 Corrected


A 297 No.

The general rule is that spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell. There is no exception noted for Voracious Dispelling.

There is no need for an exception, since the ability is not used as a "real" counterspell, but uses the counterspell function of Dispel Magic.


Dispel Magic

...

Counterspell: When dispel magic is used in this way, the spell targets a spellcaster and is cast as a counterspell. Unlike a true counterspell, however, dispel magic may not work; you must make a dispel check to counter the other spellcaster’s spell.

[Curmudgeon]

There is no need for an exception, since the ability is not used as a "real" counterspell, but uses the counterspell function of Dispel Magic. A 297 Correct Correction

That still doesn't change the general rule:
Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 297 Continued


A 297 Correct Correction

That still doesn't change the general rule:

The general rule is irrelevant. Dispel Magic's counterspell function potentially achieves the same outcome, but it is not actually used as a counterspell in the way referred to under the general rules for counterspelling or in the specific part about spell-like abilities.

[Curmudgeon]

The general rule is irrelevant. Dispel Magic's counterspell function potentially achieves the same outcome, but it is not actually used as a counterspell in the way referred to under the general rules for counterspelling or in the specific part about spell-like abilities.A 297 Continued

Dispel Magic isn't being used. Voracious Dispelling, a spell-like invocation, is. The general rule holds.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 297 Continued


A 297 Continued

Dispel Magic isn't being used. Voracious Dispelling, a spell-like invocation, is. The general rule holds.

The general rule deals with counterspells, not spells that has the effect of a counterspell and therefore does not apply.

In effect, all that is being used is a targeted Dispel Magic.

[Curmudgeon]

The general rule deals with counterspells, not spells that has[sic] the effect of a counterspell and therefore does not apply.
A 297 Continued

Pay attention to the highlighted word. The Dispel Magic spell can be used to counterspell. Spell-like invocations, even those emulating Dispel Magic, cannot be used to counterspell -- unless there's a specific exception to the general rule, and there is no such exception.
Counterspell

When dispel magic is used in this way, the spell targets a spellcaster and is cast as a counterspell.
Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A 297 Continued

Pay attention to the highlighted word. The Dispel Magic spell can be used to counterspell. Spell-like invocations, even those emulating Dispel Magic, cannot be used to counterspell -- unless there's a specific exception to the general rule, and there is no such exception.

Yes, but you are still missing the point. It is a targeted dispel effect, not a "true" counterspell, which the part of the quote that follows 8and that I quoted above also stress.

Dispel magic can be used to counterspell in two ways.
It can be cast as a counterspell, which is the option that is not available to those with spell-like abilities.
Or it can be cast as a targeted dispel effect that achieves the same outcome, but with the benefit of being able to counter just about anything, but also running risk of failing.
If you use the second option you are not "counterspelling", you are casting dispel magic, which is what can be achieved by spell-like abilities.

I realize the wording is misleading for this level of detail, but it was probably the easiest way of explaining this function of Dispel Magic.

[Curmudgeon]

If you use the second option you are not "counterspelling", you are casting dispel magic, which is what can be achieved by spell-like abilities.
You're missing the very simple point. You are not casting. You are not using Dispel Magic. You are invoking, and what you're invoking is Voracious Dispelling. While this in most ways functions like Dispel Magic, it still doesn't make it a spell. It is a spell-like invocation, and such -- no matter what spell is referenced -- can never be used for counterspelling. It doesn't matter that Dispel Magic is an indirect, rather than a direct, counterspell. It does matter that Voracious Dispelling is a spell-like invocation, and thus ab initio ineligible for counterspelling -- direct, indirect, or phrased any other way you prefer.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

But the text of Dispel Magic states "Unlike a true Counterspell", which implies that it is not actually counterspelling, but doing something very similar, with the same effects.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

You're missing the very simple point. You are not casting. You are not using Dispel Magic. You are invoking, and what you're invoking is Voracious Dispelling. While this in most ways functions like Dispel Magic, it still doesn't make it a spell. It is a spell-like invocation, and such -- no matter what spell is referenced -- can never be used for counterspelling.

On this we agree, except for the very first line and if counterspelling is used as a broad term rather than to also achieve that effect.


It doesn't matter that Dispel Magic is an indirect, rather than a direct, counterspell. It does matter that Voracious Dispelling is a spell-like invocation, and thus ab initio ineligible for counterspelling -- direct, indirect, or phrased any other way you prefer.

But it is not an indirect counterspell, it is a targeted dispel that can be used as a counterspell.


Voracious Dispelling
...
You can use dispel magic as the spell. ...


Targeted dispels are allowed for spell-like abilities and when this function of dispel magic is being used it shares many similarities with counterspells, but you are still just invoking dispel magic.

It is not a true counterspell.

[Curmudgeon]

But the text of Dispel Magic states "Unlike a true Counterspell", which implies that it is not actually counterspelling, but doing something very similar, with the same effects. We never get that far. The point doesn't come up.

Let's step through the rules. I think this will be informative from the standpoint of answering simple questions by the RAW.

You're a Warlock, and you want to be able to counterspell something. Let's step through "How Counterspells Work":

To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of the counterspell. You do this by choosing the ready action. In doing so, you elect to wait to complete your action until your opponent tries to cast a spell. (You may still move your speed, since ready is a standard action.)
Ready action: check. Fine so far.
If the target of your counterspell tries to cast a spell, make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + the spell’s level). This check is a free action. If the check succeeds, you correctly identify the opponent’s spell and can attempt to counter it. If the check fails, you can’t do either of these things.
Spellcraft check -- no problem; we're still good.
To complete the action, you must then cast the correct spell. As a general rule, a spell can only counter itself. If you are able to cast the same spell and you have it prepared (if you prepare spells), you cast it, altering it slightly to create a counterspell effect. If the target is within range, both spells automatically negate each other with no other results.
That's a stumbling block. As a Warlock, we can't cast anything; instead we use spell-like invocations. But
Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell
We need to look for an alternative.
You can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, and you don’t need to identify the spell he or she is casting. However, dispel magic doesn’t always work as a counterspell.
Stuck again. We're not capable of using Dispel Magic. We could use Voracious Dispelling if we were able to get to that point, but we can't; the rules of counterspelling allow casting Dispel Magic, but not invoking Voracious Dispelling. We never are permitted to get to Voracious Dispelling, so it doesn't matter what the text of that invocation says. We're still under the "Counterspells" section of the rules, and still stuck on
Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspellso Voracious Dispelling, a spell-like invocation, isn't available.
As a general standard action, the Warlock has no problem invoking Voracious Dispelling. The Warlock is just forbidden to get to that invocation under the counterspelling rules.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

We never get that far. The point doesn't come up.

Let's step through the rules. I think this will be informative from the standpoint of answering simple questions by the RAW.


Ahhh, but that is the problem, you are going through what happens when trying to use a spell-like ability as a counterspell, which is not allowed.

What you are doing when invoking Voracious Dispelling is to ready an action to, say, use it if you see anyone casting a spell.
If the ready action is triggered you target them with Voracious Dispelling, which is equivalent of casting a targeted dispel magic using the function that disrupts spellcasting and which bears an, in this case, confusing name.

You are not counterspelling, but there is a chance that Voracious Dispelling can counter a spell. See the difference?

[Curmudgeon]

What you are doing when invoking Voracious Dispelling is to ready an action to, say, use it if you see anyone casting a spell.
If the ready action is triggered you target them with Voracious Dispelling, which is equivalent of casting a targeted dispel magic using the function that disrupts spellcasting and which bears an, in this case, confusing name.
A "confusing name". It's rather more than that. So you want to ready a standard action, but not use the counterspelling rules. Let's follow this through. Voracious Dispelling refers to Dispel Magic, and you want to use the function labeled Counterspell.
Counterspell: When dispel magic is used in this way, the spell targets a spellcaster and is cast as a counterspell.

You are not counterspelling, but there is a chance that Voracious Dispelling can counter a spell. See the difference?
If the description specifically says that this function "is cast as a counterspell" (and surprise!, it does) you've got to continue to follow the RAW and use the rules specified for Counterspells. We've already stepped through those, and we're stuck on
Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell There are no loopholes here.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Divinech, I think I have an answer that will please everyone: Ask your DM. Because while I think the RAI supports using it and the RAW is ambiguous, any decision depends on how you see the rules, and your personal interpretation. The wording of the Counterspelling rules is too poor for a concrete determination. If there were a monster with a SLA Dispel that was mentioned as using it to counterspell, that would be different, but I don't know of any.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A "confusing name". It's rather more than that. So you want to ready a standard action, but not use the counterspelling rules. Let's follow this through. Voracious Dispelling refers to Dispel Magic, and you want to use the function labeled Counterspell.

If the description specifically says that this function "is cast as a counterspell" (and surprise!, it does) you've got to continue to follow the RAW and use the rules specified for Counterspells. We've already stepped through those, and we're stuck on There are no loopholes here.

Yes, it is cast as a counterspell, but it is not a counterspell, which is a point stressed by the next line of the description in dispel magic:


Unlike a true counterspell, ...

[Curmudgeon]

Yes, it is cast as a counterspell, but it is not a counterspell, which is a point stressed by the next line of the description in dispel magic: Once again, we don't get there. We step through the rules as specified, and when we get to "is cast as a counterspell" we immediately refer to the RAW in the "Counterspells" section. Then we learn that counterspelling is not possible with a spell-like invocation, so we stop. It doesn't matter that it's not a "true" counterspell, because the RAW forces an abrupt halt when we try to go down that path. If the description under Dispel Magic said it's not a counterspell, you would have a valid claim. But it says exactly the opposite: it "is cast as a counterspell" -- something not permitted with spell-like invocations.

[Chronos]

To break it down to its simplest: If two spellcasters both have the Voracious Dispelling spell, and one attempts to cast it, the other one can use the Counterspell action to counter it, guaranteed, by using the same spell as a counterspell. If a spellcaster attempts to cast Voracious Dispelling on a warlock, the warlock cannot use this option, because it's a spell-like ability. He can, however, use the Counterspell option of Dispel Magic (which Voracious Dispelling acts like), which has a chance (but is not guaranteed) to counter a spell.


The general rule is that spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell. There is no exception noted for Voracious Dispelling. The specific rule that's relevant here is the text of Voracious Dispelling:
You can use Dispel Magic as the spellThere is no exception noted for using it to counterspell, so the rule for Dispel Magic holds.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Once again, we don't get there. We step through the rules as specified, and when we get to "is cast as a counterspell" we immediately refer to the RAW in the "Counterspells" section. Then we learn that counterspelling is not possible with a spell-like invocation, so we stop. It doesn't matter that it's not a "true" counterspell, because the RAW forces an abrupt halt when we try to go down that path. If the description under Dispel Magic said it's not a counterspell, you would have a valid claim. But it says exactly the opposite: it "is cast as a counterspell" -- something not permitted with spell-like invocations.

Being cast as a counterspell is not the same as being a counterspell.

It follows similar rules and refers to point one of your list about selecting target, but it is still just a targeted dispel, which is allowed as a spell-like ability, used in a ready action rather than being an actual counterspell.

[Curmudgeon]

To break it down to its simplest: If two spellcasters both have the Voracious Dispelling spell, and one attempts to cast it, the other one can use the Counterspell action to counter it, guaranteed, by using the same spell as a counterspell. There is no Voracious Dispelling spell, only a Voracious Dispelling invocation. You cannot cast invocations.

[Curmudgeon]

Being cast as a counterspell is not the same as being a counterspell.
There are no rules for "being cast as a counterspell" except the counterspelling rules.

It follows similar rules and refers to point one of your list about selecting target Point 1 of my list is quoted from the "Counterspells" section of the Magic chapter, and we've already agreed that
Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspellI don't know of any "similar rules" that would let you follow your plan. Are you referring to the ready action?
Readying to Counterspell

You may ready a counterspell against a spellcaster (often with the trigger "if she starts casting a spell"). In this case, when the spellcaster starts a spell, you get a chance to identify it with a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell level). If you do, and if you can cast that same spell (are able to cast it and have it prepared, if you prepare spells), you can cast the spell as a counterspell and automatically ruin the other spellcaster’s spell. Counterspelling works even if one spell is divine and the other arcane.

A spellcaster can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, but it doesn’t always work. You want to use the first part of the rules for the ready action, but then ignore the part I just quoted which limits readying to counterspell to spellcasters, and thus excludes invokers. I call shenanigans.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

@298, not an answer:
Try this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83321) thread, they have all the 4E aficionados.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

There are no rules for "being cast as a counterspell" except the counterspelling rules.

The point was that just because I use my great club as a hammer it does not mean that it is a hammer.


Point 1 of my list is quoted from the "Counterspells" section of the Magic chapter, and we've already agreed thatI don't know of any "similar rules" that would let you follow your plan. Are you referring to the ready action? You want to use the first part of the rules for the ready action, but then ignore the part I just quoted which limits readying to counterspell to spellcasters, and thus excludes invokers. I call shenanigans.

Yes, I was also very surprised to see that warlocks were not mentioned in the PHB and especially in a line that was so exhaustive in its description of the workings of dispel magic as opposed to the actual text of dispel magic.

Being very literal in the interpretation there is support for your view, because the wording is based on generic use rather than this corner case of a spell-like ability and the warlock.

The primary source is dispel magic and the requirements is only that dispel magic is used, not that the spell has a specific source.


Counterspell: When dispel magic is used in this way, the spell targets a spellcaster and is cast as a counterspell. Unlike a true counterspell, however, dispel magic may not work; you must make a dispel check to counter the other spellcaster’s spell.

[Meat Shield]

Q299

Q: What happens to a psicrystal when the psion and his crystal enter an anti magic zone? Specifically, the psicrystals mobility (flight, legs), telepathy, speech, understanding of speech, etc. Actually, easier question - what works and what doesn't at that point.

[BizzaroStormy]

Q300

Where are the stats and cost for dynamite?

[Curmudgeon]

A 299

Extraordinary properties remain; Supernatural and Spell-like properties are inactivated in an Antimagic Field.
Psicrystal Ability Descriptions: All psicrystals have special abilities (or impart abilities to their owners) depending on the level of the owner:

Natural Armor Adj. (Ex)
Intelligence Adj. (Ex)
Alertness (Ex)
Improved Evasion (Ex)
Personality (Ex)
Sighted (Ex)
Telepathic Speech (Ex)
Power Resistance (Ex)
Psicrystal Personality (Ex)

Self-Propulsion (Su)
Share Powers (Su)
Telepathic Link (Su)
Deliver Touch Powers (Su)
Flight (Su)
Sight Link (Sp)
Channel Power (Sp)

[Frosty]

Q 311a Does Freedom of Movement allow unfettered movement within and through a Solid Fog and other similar spells? I know it'll still block line of sight. Speaking of which, is there any way one can see through Solid Fog?

Q 311b Since Solid Fog does make movement very difficult, does it in any way mess with Line of Effect of magic? I know it'll make firing an arrow into it impossible.

[Curmudgeon]

A 311a

Freedom of Movement will allow you to more normally through Solid Fog. It will block line of sight, but only past 5', so you can engage in melee against adjacent enemies normally. A Cloud Cloak (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fw/20050311a) will let you see through Solid Fog.

A 311b

There is no effect on rays and other line of effect magics -- assuming you are allowed to cast/invoke/activate them, of course.

[Adumbration]

Q 312

Is there any way to get Tumble as a class skill for a cleric or a binder? Perhaps through a feat or a domain?

[weenie]

Q 313

Can a caster, that has fallen prone due to a grease spell still cast spells normally?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

A 313
By RAW there is nothing to indicate any sort of penalty to casting, other than for spells with to-hit rolls. The text:
Prone

The character is on the ground. An attacker who is prone has a -4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A defender who is prone gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a -4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.

Standing up is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 313

Yes, there are no such restrictions. Trying to balance or trying to make melee touch attacks will result in checks and penalties, respectively.

[Fishy]

Bob the Elan Psion decides he needs some alone-time, and hits himself with the Microcosm power. His body goes catatonic until it dies of thirst, and his mind enters an entirely fabricated and hallucinatory world- but is still otherwise functioning.

Q314

Can Bob use his Elan Repletion power from inside the hallucination, to keep his body alive?

Q315

Can Bob manifest Microcosm, Psychic Chirurgery or Reality Revision on himself to exit the hallucination?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

A 312
There are a few ways, and these are just off the top of my head. The Able Learner feat makes all cross-class skills cost one point rather than 2, so with a single dip in Rogue or a PrC that has it as a class skill makes it essentially class for the remainder of your career, or you can just keep it at 1/2 of max, which may be good enough. The Martial Study:(Any Desert Wind Maneuver) Feat makes Tumble a class skill for all future classes. There are the Apprentice line of Feats in DMGII that grant some skills as class skills, Martial Artist gives Tumble and Concentration.

[Curmudgeon]

A 312

No, not with a domain. I've checked well over 100 domains and have come up empty. I've also struck out looking for a single feat that will do the job. With a pair of feats -- Apprentice for you; Mentor for another character -- and Martial Artist mentoring, you can pick up Tumble as a class skill.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 314 & 315

Yes, as it is reasonable to assume that Bob remains aware that he is inside his own head.

[Project_Mayhem]

Q 316 Gavin is a Daelkar Halfblood. He takes a Crawling Gauntlet as his free symbiont, which gives him a 1d4 dam Claw attack. Now, the question is does this allow him to full attack at full BAB with his longsword, and then use the claw as a secondary natural attack, at -5 penalty? And how about later, when he gains high enough BAB to gain additional attacks?

Thanks in advance

[Alveanerle]

Q. 317
Can a chracter with shock trooper feat charge (and eventualy hit) someone, while bullrushing (and sending to sides) other enemies standing on the way? The description of the "directed bull rush" mentions making bull rush attempts (and sending bull rushed opponents sideways) as a part of a charge.

Q. 318
During overrun maneuver, is it possible to overrun more than one opponent? Or is it "single overrung - single enemy passed" thing?

If it's a "single" thing, are there any feats/spells/whatnot that allow for overruning more than one opponent at once?

Q. 319
Since centaurs (and "similar creatures") qualify for feats that require one to be mounted (they are "self mounted"), would such a "self mounted" assumption be also valid for other quadrupeds? (yea yea, trying to find a way for the dragon - or other quadruped - to spirited charge)

Q. 320
Hydras - how many attacks would a hasted 10-headed hydra have on a full attack (and why)? 11 or 20? The "11 theory" is supported by the fact that haste adds one attack. The "20 theory" is supported by the fact that hydra attacks with each of its heads as a single attack, even if its an attack of opportunity.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 316

I do not have MoE here, but if it grants a claw without any restrictions about use then it should function like any other claw attack from creature capable of combining natural weapons with manufactured during their attack and grant a secondary natural attack that is available every time a full attack is made, regardless of number of attacks from BAB.
Note, the number of natural attacks do not incraese with BAB.

[KillianHawkeye]

Q. 321
The text of the silence spell seems to indicate that a creature doesn't get a save unless it is unwilling to be the target or "focus-point" of the spell. Is that correct?

If so, then a creature who enters a silenced area gets NO saving throw to avoid the silence effect?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 317

You can Bull Rush as part of a charge, but then you cannot also attack. (The Bull Rush is your charge "attack")

A. 318

No, it is only one enemy and I do not think there are feats that increase this.

A. 319

Not unless the description says so. Note that flying creatures can make dive attacks.

A. 320

20, one hydra attack is with all heads.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 321

Your reading is correct... Now be quiet! :smalltongue:

[Alveanerle]

Q. 322
Recover Breath feat - does it stack with itself? In other words, would it be possible for a dragon to take 3 Recover Breath feats and breath every turn?

Q. 323
If a creature that has the "rend" ability (automatic bonus damage on succesfuly striking with both claws) makes full attack with Power Attack turned on and connects with both claws, does the additional PA damage get added to the normal rend damage?

Q. 324
What are possible ways (feats/spells) of increasing the natural weapon's size (i.e. so it is treated as one size cathegory larger).

Q. 325
Deathless frenzy (Frenzied Berserker ability) states that the zerker is still vulnerable to special damage (i.e. turning to dust on disintegrate). Assuming that said frenzied zerker has deathless frenzy turned on, is below -10hp, and gets hit with the disintegrate - will he die if he MAKES his saving throw, and thus gets only the 5d6 damage?

[Curmudgeon]

A 322 Yes.

Recover Breath is a metabreath feat.

The feat stacks with the effects of metabreath feats, reducing the total time you must wait to use your breath weapon again by 1 round. As there is no exclusion (such as "with the effects of other metabreath feats"), Recover Breath stacks with itself.

[Curmudgeon]

A 323 Yes.

Power Attack applies until the beginning of the next round. As Power Attack forces you to reduce the chance of hitting for each claw, it's only equitable to add the PA bonus to rend damage if both claws hit. Note that this is a simple addition, not a doubling; two independent claw attacks aren't a two-handed weapon even if both hit in the same round.

A 324 partial

There's the obvious Improved Natural Attack feat.

[Bierhoff]

Q 325 Is there a feat which will allow a reach weapon to be used against an enemy adjacent to the attacker

Q 326 how do the Neanderthals' Primitive Weapon Mastery [Frostburn]work? do it grant exotic weapon proficiency with the weapons listed or do the exotic weapons still suffer the penalty on the listed exotic weapons and the bonus is then added?

[Curmudgeon]

A 325

Short Haft, in Players Handbook II.

[Tortoise262]

Q 327

If a weapon has a bonus effect on a hit (Such as Flaming and Wounding weapons), then does the effect take place when you a successful trip attack with it?

[Thurbane]

Q 312

Is there any way to get Tumble as a class skill for a cleric or a binder? Perhaps through a feat or a domain?
A 312 cont.
There are a couple of other options:

A level of the Human Paragon (http://dndsrd.net/unearthedParagon.html#human-paragon) (UA) class.

The Able Learner feat (RoD) and a 1 level dip in a class with Tumble as a class skill.

The Skill Knowledge (http://dndsrd.net/unearthedAlternativeSkills.html) feat (UA), although strictly speaking, this feat may only be available if you use it as part of the alternative skill rules presented.

[Bierhoff]

Q328 are there any prereqs or other conditions associated with Short Haft (PHII)?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 322 But...


A 322 Yes.

Recover Breath is a metabreath feat.
As there is no exclusion (such as "with the effects of other metabreath feats"), Recover Breath stacks with itself.

The feat cannot be taken more than once, so stacking is not even an issue.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 327

The weapon generally needs to be used in a damage dealing capacity for the effect to have a potential to take place.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 328

Bab +3, weapon focus and proficiency with weapon.

[SoD]

Q. 229

Master Specialist-if a changling wizard with the dual substitution racial substitution took this prestige class: would it get school esoterica for transmutation and illusion, or would it have to pick?

[Curmudgeon]

A. 322 But...

The feat cannot be taken more than once, so stacking is not even an issue. I don't see anything in the rules that supports your statement. From the general rules about Feat Benefits (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#benefit):
If a character has the same feat more than once, its benefits do not stack unless indicated otherwise in the description.

In general, having a feat twice is the same as having it once. This general rule presupposes that you can take feats more than once; it's just that generally you get no additional benefit. But Recover Breath does indicate otherwise in its description.

[Totally Guy]

Q330 In D&D 3.5 if you want to gain points in a new skill at level up you need to put in as many points as you have levels. What happens if you have fewer points than that? What happens if it is cross class?

[Epinephrine]

A 330 I am not aware of any such rule. The PHB says (p. 62), about gaining new skills:


If you want to pick up a new skill for your character, you can spend skill points equal to his or her character level +3. These skill points buy 1 rank each if the new skill is a class skill or 1/2 rank each if it’s a cross-class skill.

I've emphasised the word "can", as it's giving an option. I didn't find any reference to having to spend a number of points.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

I don't see anything in the rules that supports your statement. From the general rules about Feat Benefits (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#benefit): This general rule presupposes that you can take feats more than once; it's just that generally you get no additional benefit.

That is an interesting loophole. I think the general rule presupposes that you can have the same feat more than once, not take it, as evidenced by all other feats explicitly mentioning that you can take it more than once and this statement by the sage:


In fact, it’s not possible to take the feat more than once (a standard rule for feats unless stated otherwise).

Nevertheless, I think you are correct that this is not actually spelled out directly.

However, I doubt it has any implications, since feats mention any stacking in their description as you quoted.


But Recover Breath does indicate otherwise in its description.


In the case of Recover Breath the general rules for Metabreath feats on page 66 of the Draconomicon state that:


If a metabreath feat stacks with itself, this fact will be noted in the Special section of the feat description.

Any such mention is lacking that section of Recover Breath, so in this case at least there is no loophole.


You bringing this up has made me curious though. Are there anywhere where there would be a benefit? (other than in corner cases when you benefit from having a number of feats of the same type, but cannot meet the prerequisites of any other than the one(s) you already have.)

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Q 326 how do the Neanderthals' Primitive Weapon Mastery [Frostburn]work? do it grant exotic weapon proficiency with the weapons listed or do the exotic weapons still suffer the penalty on the listed exotic weapons and the bonus is then added?

A. 326

No weapon proficiency in any of the exotic weapons are granted.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 229

It is not entirely clear, but it is worth noting that any benefits are mentioned in singular form.

[Totally Guy]

A 330 I am not aware of any such rule. The PHB says (p. 62), about gaining new skills:



I've emphasised the word "can", as it's giving an option. I didn't find any reference to having to spend a number of points.

Ah I see. I was reading that as a prohibitive thing - if I can't put in that many points you can't get a new skill. But I see now what it's trying to say, it's a maximum limit.

[Curmudgeon]

In the case of Recover Breath the general rules for Metabreath feats on page 66 of the Draconomicon state that:
If a metabreath feat stacks with itself, this fact will be noted in the Special section of the feat description.Any such mention is lacking that section of Recover Breath, so in this case at least there is no loophole.
Actually, Recover Breath does state this, just not where you were looking.
RECOVER BREATH [METABREATH]
You wait less time before being able to use your breath weapon again.

Benefit: You reduce the interval between uses of your breath weapon. You wait 1 round less than usual before breathing again, but always at least 1 round. The feat stacks with the effects of metabreath feats, reducing the total time you must wait to use your breath weapon again by 1 round. The language is less direct than "this feat stacks with itself", but as Recover Breath is itself a metabreath feat, and states that it stacks with metabreath feats, the feat does stack with itself. It's just stated in the Benefit section rather than the Special section.
A dragon can use the same metabreath feat multiple times on the same breath. In some cases, this has no additional effects. In other cases, the feat’s effects are stackable. While they were trying to set a policy by stating that you could look to the Special section to see about stacking, specific language in Recover Breath's Benefit section trumps that general guideline.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

Actually, Recover Breath does state this, just not where you were looking. The language is less direct than "this feat stacks with itself", but as Recover Breath is itself a metabreath feat, and states that it stacks with metabreath feats, the feat does stack with itself. It's just stated in the Benefit section rather than the Special section. While they were trying to set a policy by stating that you could look to the Special section to see about stacking, specific language in Recover Breath's Benefit section trumps that general guideline.

I disagree with your interpretation.
It makes more sense if that line refers to other metabreath feats.

It is not written in the benefit section as Draconomicon says it should, so I would not choose the interpretation that ignores the RAW when the alternative explanation is just as valid.

Feats that stack with themselves are usually fairly explicit about it, which further supports that RB is not intended to stack with itself.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I disagree with your interpretation.
It makes more sense if that line refers to other metabreath feats.

It is not written in the benefit section as Draconomicon says it should, so I would not choose the interpretation that ignores the RAW when the alternative explanation is just as valid.

Feats that stack with themselves are usually fairly explicit about it, which further supports that RB is not intended to stack with itself.But it doesn't say 'other' anywhere. It makes a blanket statement "This feat stacks with metabreath feats", without any indication that it is excluded from the stacking.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

But it doesn't say 'other' anywhere. It makes a blanket statement "This feat stacks with metabreath feats", without any indication that it is excluded from the stacking.

And hence the confusion, but why would their be a need to be that explicit when a few pages before it has been made clear that any self-stacking will be explicitly noted in a different section?

[Curmudgeon]

And hence the confusion, but why would their be a need to be that explicit when a few pages before it has been made clear that any self-stacking will be explicitly noted in a different section?
WotC has never had a great reputation for consistency, particularly in feats. The Player's Handbook makes this statement in its Feats chapter:
Normal: What a character who does not have this feat is limited to or restricted from doing. If not having the feat causes no particular drawback, this entry is absent. So here's an example that follows this policy:
Normal: Without this feat, you provoke an attack of opportunity when you make a touch attack to start a grapple. ... and here's one that doesn't:
Benefit: When you perform a bull rush you do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender. You also gain a +4 bonus on the opposed Strength check you make to push back the defender. There is no "Normal" section for Improved Bull Rush -- even though the Feat "rules" say that there will be one. If we take the PH policy statement about what information will be included in feats as an actual rule, then the lack of a "Normal" section means there is no AoO on bull rushes normally. That's pretty clearly the wrong way to read D&D documentation.

There is a consistent pattern, starting from the beginning of the 3.5 game, of ignoring policy statements about how feats are described. Thus it is a failure of critical thinking to suppose that failure to follow such policies invalidates a feat's benefit. Policy statements are formatting guidelines to the game authors, and clues to the readers about where they can typically look for related information. Yet another example of D&D authors not following policy isn't enough to override clear statements about whether a particular feat like Recover Breath stacks. So they put the information in the "Benefit" section instead of the "Special" section -- we just shrug and accept the inconsistency; the feat remains comprehendible.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

WotC has never had a great reputation for consistency, particularly in feats.

Generally I agree, but when it comes to self-stacking of feats they have been fairly consistent:
If feats can be taken more than once it is explicitly mentioned in its description and the consequences are outlined with a certain degree of detail.


There is a consistent pattern, starting from the beginning of the 3.5 game, of ignoring policy statements about how feats are described. Thus it is a failure of critical thinking to suppose that failure to follow such policies invalidates a feat's benefit. Policy statements are formatting guidelines to the game authors, and clues to the readers about where they can typically look for related information.

Generalizing from one area related to feats to all areas is an equally flawed approach.



Yet another example of D&D authors not following policy isn't enough to override clear statements about whether a particular feat like Recover Breath stacks. So they put the information in the "Benefit" section instead of the "Special" section -- we just shrug and accept the inconsistency; the feat remains comprehendible.

The feats is only read clearly as stacking with itself, because you are viewing it through the loophole.
If you look at the sentence in context it becomes clear, IMHO, that interpreting it as referring to the other metabreath feats is the most reasonable approach.

If I see conflicting interpretations I generally prefer the one closest to RAI.

[Curmudgeon]

Generalizing from one area related to feats to all areas is an equally flawed approach. I wasn't generalizing too much. I pointed out an example in the core feats where there was a policy about where information should have been included, yet where instead this information was stuck in the "Benefit" section of the feat. Recover Breath follows that same pattern.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

I wasn't generalizing too much. I pointed out an example in the core feats where there was a policy about where information should have been included, yet where instead this information was stuck in the "Benefit" section of the feat. Recover Breath follows that same pattern.

The difference is that the omission of the Normal section is a much smaller sin, since it is only reiterating the rules as a courtesy.

I think the line in RB is there as a courtesy rather than as a specific rule to override the general stacking rules.
It merely tells us that this feat will reduce recovery time even if other metabreath feats are used. A conclusion we would have arrived at through deduction in any case, but nevertheless the designers try to be helpful and ends up confusing us through poor choice of words....

[Curmudgeon]

The difference is that the omission of the Normal section is a much smaller sin, since it is only reiterating the rules as a courtesy.

I think the line in RB is there as a courtesy rather than as a specific rule to override the general stacking rules.
So you're creating a new category of rules interpretation: "courtesy rules", which can be ignored? This doesn't fit in a RAW discussion. Feel free to create a new thread to discuss this idea.

It merely tells us that this feat will reduce recovery time even if other metabreath feats are used. No, it doesn't say that at all, and we've already covered this ground before.
But it doesn't say 'other' anywhere. It makes a blanket statement "This feat stacks with metabreath feats", without any indication that it is excluded from the stacking.

[KillianHawkeye]

This place is starting to look like a discussion thread. :smallamused: Ahem...

Q. 331 (I think...)

Does a Dread Wraith's Lifesense ability (which acts as Blindsight on living creatures within 60 ft.) counter the normal miss chance that incorporeal creatures have to contend with when attacking someone from within a solid structure such as a floor or wall?

In other words, does the Lifesense work through solid objects?

[Douglas]

A322
Draconomicon page 66, last sentence of the Metabreath Feats section:

If a metabreath feat stacks with itself, this fact will be noted in the Special section of the feat description
Recover Breath's Special section does not include such a note, so it does not stack with itself.

[fractic]

A 331

Blindsight needs line of effect to work. So it won't work through solid objects. See page 306 of the MM.

[Thurbane]

Q. 332

The Sacred Purification feat (PHB2) says that it heals all living creatures within a 60ft radius burst, and deals damage to undead in the same area. My questions are:
A. Does the healing include enemies? The wording would seem to indicate yes, that it does not discriminate between allies and enemies.
B. Do the undead get a save? I don't believe a save is mentioned, so I would say no...but the fact the undead get a Will save for 1/2 against Cure spells makes me wonder...

[LoneStarNorth]

Q 333

Can Improved Natural Attack apply to an attack form that deals ability damage, specifically an allip's Wisdom drain?

[Epinephrine]

Q334 The spell Essence of the Raptor reads in part: "Your speed increases to 60 feet (if it is already 60 feet or faster, it does not change)"

How does this work with other bonuses to speed? It seems odd that order of effect would matter (since typically, order doesn't matter in D&D).

a) If you gain an enhancement bonus after Essence of the Raptor, does it add to your speed?
b) If you have an enhancement bonus beforehand, does it simply vanish?
c) If you have an enhancement bonus like a monk's speed, or the typeless speed bonus a barbarian gets, can you simply pick up something heavy (thus no longer getting your speed bonus, as you enter medium encumbrance, or to negate the barbarian's bonus, heavy) and put it back down, thus gaining your bonus after the Essence of the Raptor is in effect, or pick something up prior to having the spell cast on you? If that works, isn't it absurd?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

So you're creating a new category of rules interpretation: "courtesy rules", which can be ignored? This doesn't fit in a RAW discussion. Feel free to create a new thread to discuss this idea.

The first line was to explain why blanket generalization might not always be a good idea. Especially when the example used to generalize from is not creating new rules, but just reiterating already existing rules.

Notice how that the second line is a separate paragraph and is not the basis of the RAW.


No, it doesn't say that at all, and we've already covered this ground before.


Yes, and now Douglas has once again:


Recover Breath's Special section does not include such a note, so it does not stack with itself.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 332


Q. 332

The Sacred Purification feat (PHB2) says that it heals all living creatures within a 60ft radius burst, and deals damage to undead in the same area. My questions are:
A. Does the healing include enemies? The wording would seem to indicate yes, that it does not discriminate between allies and enemies.
B. Do the undead get a save? I don't believe a save is mentioned, so I would say no...but the fact the undead get a Will save for 1/2 against Cure spells makes me wonder...

Sacred Purification does not discriminate against foes nor does it offer Undeads a save.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 333

No, it only applies to natural weapons.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 334

The spell changes your base speed, it does not act as a bonus, which means that any bonuses you may have can be added to to your new base speed of 60.

Any encumbrance effects are based on your base speed + modifiers and are not overwritten by the spell. It merely affects base speed.


Note, I did not read the spell description.

[Adumbration]

Q 335

Can you apply Intensify to a spell that has already been Enhanced?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 335

Yes, the dice cap is not a variable numeric effect of a spell.

[Douglas]

A335
Yes. An Enhanced Intensified Delayed Blast Fireball with caster level 30+ would deal 30d6 damage maximized and doubled, for a total of 30*6*2 = 360 damage. If you do not have Improved Metamagic or any other metamagic reducers, it would take an 18th level spell slot, however.

[Miraqariftsky]

Q336 One and a half the Str bonus is added if a character wields a two-handed weapon. If a character has an odd-numbered Str bonus... like +3 or +5 and that character wields a two-handed weapon, how much would be the THW damage on top of the normal Str bonus--- 3.5... 5.5... how would it be rounded off?

[Epinephrine]

A336 Always round down.


In general, if you wind up with a fraction, round down, even if the
fraction is one-half or larger. For example, if a fireball deals you 17
points of damage, but you succeed at your saving throw and only
take half damage, you take 8 points of damage.
Exception: Certain rolls, such as damage and hit points, have a
minimum of 1.

[Alveanerle]

Q. 337
If a caster provokes an attack of opportunity by casting a spell (either due to not casting it defensively or due to failing the "casting defensively" concentration check) and gets hit for some damage, does he have to make the standard concentration check vs the damage dealt to finish the spell?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 337

Yes, this is also noted in a footnote to the table in the description of the Concentration skill.

[Gorbash]

Q. 338

Can feat Boost Construct (EPH, p. 43) be taken multiple times, each time taking a different ability?

Q. 339

Concerning grapple - in the description it says that's it's a special melee attack, so do spells that grant a bonus on attack rolls also apply on grapple checks?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 338

Regardless of how many times you have the feat you can only grant one special ability to your construct.

A. 339

Grapple checks are not attack rolls in spite of the similarities.

[MeklorIlavator]

Q. 340
If you have a penalty to your caster level, would practiced spell caster help assuage the penalty?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 340

Yes, the benefits of the feat are applied whenever they are most beneficial.

[monty]

Q 341

Are there any prestige classes that
a) Grant Turn/Rebuke Undead
b) Advance full divine casting (at least to the level that you get Turn Undead)
c) Are available for a CE character
?

[Defiant]

Q 342

Does Sneak Attack Damage scale with size at all? Do both a tiny level 1 rogue and a huge level 1 rogue deal 1d6 sneak attack damage?

Q 343

Do spells and their damage at all change with size? Do equal-level wizards deal equal amount of damage with a fireball when one is Diminutive and the other is Gargantuan?

Q 344

Is it possible to imbue Adamantine and Mithril items with magic normally? For example, would a +1 armor enhancement bonus on a Mithril item be possible and cost 1000gp?

[Shhalahr Windrider]

A 342

No. Sneak Attack damage is determined solely by class level.

A 343

No. Damage is determined entirely by the spell, caster level, and anything else specified in the spell description.

A 344

Yes. These items are no different than any other material with that respect. Note that mithril and adamantine objects are automatically masterwork, so any mithril or adamantine object may be enchanted.

[Obahai]

Q. 343

Can a druid take the augment summoning feat, after taking the spell focus feat?

[RTGoodman]

A 345 (not 343)


Can a druid take the augment summoning feat, after taking the spell focus feat?

Yes, as long as a character meets the pre-requisites for a feat, he can take it.

[dspeyer]

Q 346

If an incantrix with improved metamagic applies multiple feats to a single spell-cast, does the level reduction apply once or per-feat?

Q 347

If an incantrix with improved metamagic has spellcasting classes other than the one incantrix advances, can he use it with those classes?

[monty]

Q 348

Does a non-cleric who gains bonus domains through prestige classes gain any benefit from them, besides the granted powers?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 346

Yes, but you cannot reduce below one.

A. 347

Yes.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 348 partial

The spell list is expanded whether the spells can actually be cast.

[Fax Celestis]

Q349 If I have two feats that trigger off the same event (ie: two feats that do something when I land a critical), do they both go off? Even if they have similar effects (such as is the case with Gruesome Finish (EoE) and Eviscerator (LoM))? If they have similar (or the same) effect, as in the prior example, do they stack?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 349

There is no order of application so you use whatever order is most beneficial to you, in your example it makes no difference though.
Unless otherwise noted or stipulated elsewhere in the rules such effects would also stack as is the case in your example were the target potentially becomes both shaken and frightened.

[Fax Celestis]

Q349Cont Because of the way fear effect stack, wouldn't the target in my example become panicked?

[The Mormegil]

Q 350:
Where can I find a (qualified) resource for epic level melee PCs? Like, a guide, a list of priorities, or something that otherwise treats epic-level fighting without talking about epic casting or quite-normal-only-better casting?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 349 Continued


Q349Cont Because of the way fear effect stack, wouldn't the target in my example become panicked?

I did not read Gruesome Finish. (I assumed you were literal when you said same effect:smalltongue:) If that alone results in a frightened state it would indeed result in the panicked condition, assuming the feat does not state otherwise of course.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 350

I believe Complete warrior has some notes on Epic play, but if you found the Epic Level handbook lacking in this regard there are not that many sources.

There are a lot of helpful people on this board though....

[Defiant]

Q 351

What do you do when you run out of room in your spellbook? Do you have to buy another one? Can you study out of more than one spellbook?

If yes, then what's the point of having the 100-page limitation? A spellbook costs 15gp, which is a pittance compared to the 100gp/page spell cost.

Q 352

Are there any fancy spellbooks that are better in some way than regular spellbooks? How?

I realize you may not be allowed due to copyright to tell me the specifics; if so, then I'd be fine if you just pointed me to a specific book (and a specific page would be even better).

[Fax Celestis]

A351 The main problem is with protecting multiple spellbooks. No problems studying from multiples.

A352 Check out Boccob's Blessed Book (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#blessedBook): alliterative and functional.

[monty]

A. 348 partial

The spell list is expanded whether the spells can actually be cast.

348 Clarification

Specifically for a Favored Soul, does this mean that the spells are automatically added to my spells known, or that I can take them as spells known if I couldn't before, or what?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 351

Yes, you can just buy another one. There is no limitation on the number you can own and use.

The limitation is most likely dues to verisimilitude.

A. 352

Yes.


[Boccob's] Blessed Book: This well-made tome is always of small size, typically no more than 12 inches tall, 8 inches wide, and 1 inch thick. All such books are durable, waterproof, bound with iron overlaid with silver, and locked.

A wizard can fill the 1,000 pages of a blessed book with spells without paying the 100 gp per page material cost. This book is never found as randomly generated treasure with spells already inscribed in it.

Moderate transmutation; CL 7th; Craft Wondrous Item, secret page; Price 12,500 gp;Weight 1 lb.

Complete Arcane, Complete Mage and Tome and Blood hold other related stuff.

[Defiant]

Q 352 Cont.

I meant some sort of different spine or something... I remember I once had someone want a Platinum or Titanium (I forget) spellbook that cost a lot, but was presumably better in some way. I can't for the life of me remember what book it was in (and I've looked through the books and couldn't find it).

Q 353

What is the danger to a spellbook? Essentially, what are you protecting it from?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

348 Clarification

Specifically for a Favored Soul, does this mean that the spells are automatically added to my spells known, or that I can take them as spells known if I couldn't before, or what?

Domain access does not imply that they are added to your spells known list, unless otherwise noted. The spell list available to choose from is just expanded.

[Fax Celestis]

A353 A wizard without his spellbook is a fighter without his sword or a rogue with a big ol' bell around his neck. Stealing (or destroying) a wizard's spellbook, therefore, is the best way to make an opponent wizard completely ineffective--or at the very least cause him to spend a good deal of money building up his arsenal again.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

A. 353

Theft, critically failed saves, sunder attempts and DMs, to name a few.

[someonenonotyou]

Q. 354 what the difference between a wizard and a sorcerer? (so like the start of a joke).