Dysfunctional Rules IV- It's like a sandwich made of RAW failure!

[Ksheep]

Fax_Celestis:


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there are rules for this in Stormwrack.
edit: Yes, on page 81

p.s. Ksheep: The FAQ may not be RAW, but it is certainly official, which generally puts it in the quasi-useful zone that exists below errata, but above random stranger on the internets opinion. If doubt exists, you might as well rely on the FAQ until you can find acceptable proof in one of the books to follow.

Page 81? Can't find anything there about maximum jump distance while swimming on that page. Page 85 talks about jumping while swimming, and while it says that you use your swim speed to determine the Jump skill modifier, it does not say that you use the swim speed to determine the maximum distance traveled in a jump per round. In fact, for Long Jump, it states that "crossing horizontal distance in the air requires a long jump, just as described under the Jump skill in the Player's Handbook." It does not override anything mentioned in the PHB, so the "normal maximum movement in a round" clause is still in effect.

[Pickford]

Page 81? Can't find anything there about maximum jump distance while swimming on that page. Page 85 talks about jumping while swimming, and while it says that you use your swim speed to determine the Jump skill modifier, it does not say that you use the swim speed to determine the maximum distance traveled in a jump per round. In fact, for Long Jump, it states that "crossing horizontal distance in the air requires a long jump, just as described under the Jump skill in the Player's Handbook." It does not override anything mentioned in the PHB, so the "normal maximum movement in a round" clause is still in effect.

So you don't consider this part important?:

Creatures without swim speeds generally can't make jumps out of water.

[Andezzar]

This though says nothing about which speed to use to calculate when the creature lands or whether its jump check is modified. Most likely the authors intended to use the swim speed for both, but the rules never say so.

Also "generally" weakens the statement.

[silly]Grammatically the sentence could also mean "Creatures without swim speeds generally can't make jumps unless immersed in water."[/silly] What they wanted to say though is "Creatures without swim speeds generally can't exit a body of water through jumping"

[The Viscount]

Justice of Weald and Woe may have a name that sparks confusion and improperly placed casting description text, but it does have one perk. At level one your fort and ref saves are +3 instead of +2, and the accelerated save progression is maintained in all 10 levels.

[Pickford]

This though says nothing about which speed to use to calculate when the creature lands or whether its jump check is modified. Most likely the authors intended to use the swim speed for both, but the rules never say so.

Also "generally" weakens the statement.

[silly]Grammatically the sentence could also mean "Creatures without swim speeds generally can't make jumps unless immersed in water."[/silly] What they wanted to say though is "Creatures without swim speeds generally can't exit a body of water through jumping"

No, generally just indicates you need 'another' rule (an exception) to allow it.

And your reading is not grammatically correct.

[georgie_leech]

No, generally just indicates you need 'another' rule (an exception) to allow it.

And your reading is not grammatically correct.

It's an entirely valid reading; "(Creatures without swim speeds) cannot make jumps (out of water)" is a grammatically correct parsing, albeit an incredibly silly one that no one honestly thinks is intended.

To put it another way, "out of" can mean either "leave the (water)" or "(jumps that) take place outside of (the water)." Both meanings result in valid sentences.

Either way, that doesn't actually say that you use swim speed to determine maximum jumping distance out of the water, so the dysfunction stands.

[NeoPhoenix0]

A creature with swallow whole has a number of creatures that it can hold in it's stomach. For example, a Sea Drake (Fiend Folio) can hold 2 large, 4 medium, or 16 small or smaller creatures in it's stomach.

The Sea Drake could hold a swarm in it's stomach, but it would be unable to hold the creatures that make up the swarm in it's stomach, because there would be too many of them.

I'm pretty sure this applies to a few other monsters too.

[7th son of sons]

I much lime the ranged threat (threaten a 15 ft area of effect for purpose of making attacks of opportunity) and Clever Opportunity (Switch places with any target you get an AoO on)

Oh, hello Mr. Wizard, meet my friends!

[Scow2]

The Sea Drake could hold a swarm in it's stomach, but it would be unable to hold the creatures that make up the swarm in it's stomach, because there would be too many of them.

Not a dysfunction. Swarms are explicitly counted as a single creature for these kinds of purposes.

[Chronos]

One must wonder how the swarm got swallowed to begin with, though... Is it possible to grapple a swarm?

[Harrow]

One must wonder how the swarm got swallowed to begin with, though... Is it possible to grapple a swarm?

I don't think so, but you could swallow something that then Plolymorphs into a swarm.

For reference, a swarm of Tiny Flyers consists of 1,000 creatures, many times what something like a Sea Drake could Swallow Whole one at a time.

[NeoPhoenix0]

swarms do not have to remain swarms. If the swarm decides it doesn't want to be a swarm anymore then it doesn't count as a single creature anymore.

I need to think about how the swarm got in the stomach for a bit, though.

[TuggyNE]

Not a dysfunction. Swarms are explicitly counted as a single creature for these kinds of purposes.

It's not a RAW dysfunction, no; it's just a brain-bender, because a seemingly insignificant metagame difference has absurdly disproportionate in-game effects.

(As far as I know, there's no RAW translation possible between "swarm of 300 tiny creatures" and "300 tiny creatures". Either you have a swarm, which is counted as a single creature for most purposes, or else you have a ton of creatures, and there's no way for a swarm to say "OK, now we are a ton of creatures" or vice versa; polymorph et al work only on a single creature at a time and cannot combine multiple into one.)

[NeoPhoenix0]

I guess there is no RAW transition from one to the other. It seems implied though, especially in some of their own adventures.

But still, I have a swarm of thousands of creatures that fit in the stomach, but 17 bats are too many.

Edit: as for ways to get a swarm into the stomach...

• Creature inside of stomach summons a swarm
• Swarm was inside a bag of holding type space on creature swallowed and then released
• The polymorphing effect mentioned above

[Chronos]

Actually, there is a way for a swarm to become a bunch of individuals: That's what happens when you "kill" a swarm:

Traits

A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernable anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking. A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage. Reducing a swarm to 0 hit points or lower causes it to break up...

Or use nonlethal damage:

A swarm rendered unconscious by means of nonlethal damage becomes disorganized and dispersed, and does not reform until its hit points exceed its nonlethal damage.

[NeoPhoenix0]

How well do swarms handle drowning? afb

Cause things can drown in a sea drakes's stomach.

It would be hilarious if the swarm drowned in the sea drake's stomach and it had to suddenly spit up hundreds/thousands of creatures. (not sure if they are dead or not though.)

[Necroticplague]

Speaking of swarms remind me of something odd related to wildshaping into them, as well as another wildshape related rule oversight.

Thing1:Normally, druids aare prevented from wildshaping into swarms because they are too small:even though the swarm has space 10, it is still Tiny/Diminuitive/Fine. Enter the Master of Many Forms. They can use their wildshape, at higher levels, to turn into tiny and diminuitive creatures, allowing them to become a swarm. However, Wildshape, as perAlternate Form, doesn't allow you to pick up subtypes other than aqutic. Ergo, despite being a swarm, you don't gain the swarm subtype.Most of the swarm-related abilities still work, since they merely involve moving into space and covering up several squares (which you still do).However, you miss out on most the perks of turning into a swarm in the first place (though you do avoid the weakness to area attacks).

Thing2:Wildshape causes you to restore HP as if you had rested for the night. Divine Minion's fast wildshape is as druid, but they have infinite uses and can use it as a free action. Put two and two together for infinite self-heal every turn.

[TuggyNE]

Actually, there is a way for a swarm to become a bunch of individuals: That's what happens when you "kill" a swarm:


Or use nonlethal damage:

I thought of that, but it wasn't clear how many of those individuals are left.

Although I suppose non-lethal should leave all of them. Hmm. Fair enough, I guess there's one way.

[NeoPhoenix0]

I thought of that, but it wasn't clear how many of those individuals are left.

Although I suppose non-lethal should leave all of them. Hmm. Fair enough, I guess there's one way.

I hate to bring it up because I'm not a fan of this particular dysfunction, but wouldn't it not matter if they are alive or dead since RAW doesn't make much of a distinction between a living creature and a dead creature?

[Scow2]

Actually, there is a way for a swarm to become a bunch of individuals: That's what happens when you "kill" a swarm

However, those 'individuals' are non-entities in the game world, of absolutely no consequence. Swarms are a VERY abstract concept.

[NeoPhoenix0]

However, those 'individuals' are non-entities in the game world, of absolutely no consequence. Swarms are a VERY abstract concept.

Bat Swarm and Bat are both in the monster manual. Are you saying a swarm of bats that is a bat swarm disappears when the swarm is damaged enough to die or be knocked unconscious?

[Scow2]

Bat Swarm and Bat are both in the monster manual. Are you saying a swarm of bats that is a bat swarm disappears when the swarm is damaged enough to die or be knocked unconscious?

As far as the game is concerned, yes.

[NeoPhoenix0]

As far as the game is concerned, yes.

Really, because it gives us a rough number of creatures that make up a swarm. It also gives us stats for an individual creature. It doesn't say the creatures disappear. It doesn't say the individual creatures of a swarm are any different than a normal individual creature. Therefore, I suggest that the rules suggest that the creatures do not just disappear from a confined area and are clearly defined as individuals once the swarm has dispersed. since the rules do not suggest otherwise, it seems to mean that we have a large number of individual unconscious or dead bats.

[TuggyNE]

Really, because it gives us a rough number of creatures that make up a swarm. It also gives us stats for an individual creature.

Actually there are stats only for some swarm creatures. There are no individual hellwasps, no individual locusts, no individual centipedes or spiders, and no … ruins, or whatever it is ruin swarms are made of. Also no maggots for a worm that walks.

[Ksheep]

Actually there are stats only for some swarm creatures. There are no individual hellwasps, no individual locusts, no individual centipedes or spiders, and no … ruins, or whatever it is ruin swarms are made of. Also no maggots for a worm that walks.

Well, there are Monstrous Spiders and Centipedes, which have stats for Tiny size, but the Swarm version claims that they are Diminutive, so I guess that's a moot point…

[NeoPhoenix0]

Actually there are stats only for some swarm creatures. There are no individual hellwasps, no individual locusts, no individual centipedes or spiders, and no … ruins, or whatever it is ruin swarms are made of. Also no maggots for a worm that walks.

Nitpicking aside, it's still dysfunctional if even one such swarm exists, like the bats.

Ruin swarms are obviously made out of the concept of "ruin". Ignore the text about unnamed vermin.

[TuggyNE]

Nitpicking aside, it's still dysfunctional if even one such swarm exists, like the bats.

Well, there's probably several dysfunctions (one of them being that it's quite possible that swarms really do just disintegrate into thin air once they hit 0), but the existence of one or two possible candidates for individual creatures doesn't in itself guarantee that swarms can and should separate into such individual creatures once they hit 0.

In fact, given that fighting a bat swarm of 13 HP could easily end in having to track 5000 individual bats of 1 HP each (how much damage did they take?), I think it is actually unreasonable, not to mention highly impractical, to assume the individual creatures remain.

[Ksheep]

In fact, given that fighting a bat swarm of 13 HP could easily end in having to track 5000 individual bats of 1 HP each (how much damage did they take?), I think it is actually unreasonable, not to mention highly impractical, to assume the individual creatures remain.

Actually, there's evidence that the Bat and Bat Swarm are not the same. The Bat entry states that "statistics presented here describe small, insectivorous bats", while the Swarm entry states that "a bat swarm seeks to surround and attack any warm-blooded prey it encounters". While not a direct contradiction, it stands to reason that an insectivorous bat would not seek out warm-blooded prey, and as such the two are referring to different types of bat.

EDIT: However, if we assume that they ARE interchangeable, then we have an interesting quirk pop up: Swarm of Bats is CR 2, while Bat is CR 1/10. Using an Encounter Generator, it appears that 5,000 Bats results in an EL of 17.9… Just when you thought you've won an easy fight, the EL increases dramatically.

[TuggyNE]

Actually, there's evidence that the Bat and Bat Swarm are not the same. The Bat entry states that "statistics presented here describe small, insectivorous bats", while the Swarm entry states that "a bat swarm seeks to surround and attack any warm-blooded prey it encounters". While not a direct contradiction, it stands to reason that an insectivorous bat would not seek out warm-blooded prey, and as such the two are referring to different types of bat.

Yeah, I noticed that too but didn't mention it.

EDIT: However, if we assume that they ARE interchangeable, then we have an interesting quirk pop up: Swarm of Bats is CR 2, while Bat is CR 1/10. Using an Encounter Generator, it appears that 5,000 Bats results in an EL of 17.9… Just when you thought you've won an easy fight, the EL increases dramatically.

At least regular bats have no attacks (a fact I didn't previously notice and that rather puts paid to the interchangeability idea entirely). Otherwise that really would be rather painful, since you'd end up with 250 bats at each initiative between 3 and 22, and each clump would hit a minimum of 12 times. Unless you have DR, do not lose initiative to them.

On the upside, AoEs take them down fast.

[bekeleven]

I think everyone here is forgetting the Mob template from DMGII. A mob is a gargantuan creature composed of 48 Small/Medium Creatures or 12 large creatures.

I'm not saying it's easy to swallow one whole (you'd have to reduce its size first), but it could be done.