Simple RAW Thread for 3.5 #35: 3/2 Score And Four Threads Ago

[St Fan]

A 596

If you apply strictly the order by which skill ranks and feats are gained, then yes, you can only profit of the new class skill on gaining a level after gaining the feat.

(The retraining rules from Player's Handbook II can help circumvent the problem by reassigning skill ranks already gained.)

Note, however, that it is a widely applied unwritten rule by DMs that new features gained with a level are always taken in the most favorable order for the character (especially as far as prerequisites are concerned).

Also note that one such a feat (Truename Training) automatically turns any cross-class skill ranks assigned to Truenaming into full skill ranks, to precisely avoid such issues. Extending this rule to other such feats wouldn't be an unreasonable homebrew.

[JeminiZero]

Q 597
What happens if you cast Shadow Walk within a Maze, and then use it to try and return to the fight.

[Duke of Urrel]

Q 597
What happens if you cast Shadow Walk within a Maze, and then use it to try and return to the fight.

A 597

Ask your dungeon master.

I can think of a reason why the Shadow Walk spell should work. It's the following passage from the description of the Maze spell.

Spells and abilities that move a creature within a plane, such as teleport and dimension door, do not help a creature escape a maze spell, although a plane shift spell allows it to exit to whatever plane is designated in that spell.

The Shadow Walk spell works just like the Phase Shift spell with the Plane of Shadow as its destination. So the Shadow Walk spell should work.

On the other hand...

There might be a cosmological reason why you cannot cast the Shadow Walk spell from inside an extradimensional space, such as the space that the Maze spell creates and imprisons you in.

The following quotation is from page 62 of the MANUAL OF THE PLANES v. 3.0.

Within the D&D cosmology, the Plane of Shadow connects only with the Astral Plane and the Material Plane.

The Astral Plane, which the Phase Shift spell uses, is coterminous with (i.e. overlaps with and is accessible from) every other plane of existence in the multiverse, including extradimensional spaces. However, the Plane of Shadow overlaps with only the Astral Plane and the Material Plane. Since the Plane of Shadow does not overlap with extradimensional spaces, the Shadow Walk spell should not work inside the Maze spell.

Whether you accept the first argument or the second argument depends on how the various planes of existence overlap in the milieu that your dungeon master has created, so...

Ask your dungeon master.

[WaroftheCrans]

Q598

For the Master Specialist's 2nd level ability, Expanded Spellbook, can the spells be from any spell list? I know it has to be of your chosen school, but is there anything preventing you from nabbing, say, summon nature's ally? I can't find anything contradicting this, but want to be sure.

When you reach 2nd level, you can add one spell of your chosen school to your spellbook. The spell can be of any level that you can cast, and it is in addition to the normal spells gained when increasing your level. You can add another spell of your chosen school to your spellbook at 5th and at 8th level

[Blue Jay]

Q598

For the Master Specialist's 2nd level ability, Expanded Spellbook, can the spells be from any spell list? I know it has to be of your chosen school, but is there anything preventing you from nabbing, say, summon nature's ally? I can't find anything contradicting this, but want to be sure.

A598

No, you can only pick from the wizard list. The general rule is that a wizard can only pick his spells known from the wizard list. If an ability overrides the general rule, it will explicitly say that it overrides the general rule. So, if an ability allows you to pick from another list, it will explicitly say that you can pick from another list. If it says nothing about which list you can pick from, then you assume that the general rule still applies, which in this case means that your spells known must come from the wizard list.

[Thurbane]

Q 599

The Dweomerkeeper's Supernatural Spell ability allow the caster to cast as spell as a supernatural ability which, among other things, means it does not require any components.

Would this allow the caster to ignore racial components, such as with the Dominate Vermin or Aberrate spells?

[Saintheart]

Q 599

The Dweomerkeeper's Supernatural Spell ability allow the caster to cast as spell as a supernatural ability which, among other things, means it does not require any components.

Would this allow the caster to ignore racial components, such as with the Dominate Vermin or Aberrate spells?

A 599

There are two ways to look at it.

By RAW, assuming one reads the word "components" in the Dweomerkeeper's entry as meaning components of all kinds, whether special or otherwise, then the answer is "Yes".

However, also by RAW, in the case of Aberrate and other spells from the Book of Vile Darkness that have the 'racial component', they are termed special components required for spells "in addition to the components from the PHB." Because the Dweomerkeeper only on the RAW allows one to eschew "components" and does not refer to "special components", it is at least arguable that the Supernatural Spell ability does not apply to it.

Speaking editorially, the writers of BoVD really should have used the word "prerequisite" in place of "component" on page 83. One assumes they didn't because they didn't want to create yet another template block, make the book longer, and therefore make it more expensive.

[newguydude1]

q 600

whats a moon in d&d? steal life only works under a full moon so i want to make my own moon so i can cast it all the time.

q 601
is genesis in 3.5? complete divine replaced it in the creation domain.

[Dimers]

A 601

Yes. Somehow the hypertext SRD site has it categorized with Epic things even though it's plainly a 9th-level spell. So it doesn't show up on the main spell list. But a search for "demiplane" will get you right there.

[Blue Jay]

A 601

Yes. Somehow the hypertext SRD site has it categorized with Epic things even though it's plainly a 9th-level spell. So it doesn't show up on the main spell list. But a search for "demiplane" will get you right there.

A 601 Addendum

That's because it's printed in the Epic Level Handbook (p. 117).

[KillianHawkeye]

A 601 Addendum

That's because it's printed in the Epic Level Handbook (p. 117).

Re: 601

For the sake of completeness, note that Epic Level Handbook is a 3.0e book that just happens to have some OGL content that's shown in some unofficial online SRDs like d20srd. That material hasn't been updated to 3.5 edition.

[St Fan]

Q 602

The SRD mentions that "Creating magic double-headed weapons is treated as creating two weapons when determining cost, time, XP, and special abilities."

A) Does this mean that each head of a double weapon can be enchanted separately? Can you have a masterwork double weapon with just one head enchanted, and the other normal? Or with different powers on each head?

B) How does Weapon Augment Crystals (Magic Item Compendium) interact with double weapons? Can you still only put one on a double weapon? Will its power be granted to both heads?

[Khedrac]

A 602 A Yes they can, and yes you can.
looking at the footnotes to the table of common magical weapons:

Masterwork double weapons incur double the masterwork cost to account for each head (+300 gp masterwork cost per head for a total of +600 gp). Double weapons have separate magical bonuses for their different heads. If randomly determined, the second head of a double weapon has the same enhancement bonus as the main head (01–50 on d%), doubling the cost of the bonus, or its enhancement bonus is one less (51–100 on d%) and it has no special abilities. All magic weapons are masterwork weapons.

Since you can therefore have a +2/masterwork weapon there is no requirement to enchant both ends.

B) How does Weapon Augment Crystals (Magic Item Compendium) interact with double weapons? Can you still only put one on a double weapon? Will its power be granted to both heads?

Err, good question - I doubt if there is a good formal answer to this.
MIC page 221 states that only one can be attached to an item, so the limit of one per double weapon is hard RAW.
From this one can deduce reasonably enough that it will function if either end of the weapon qualifies and hits.
It further states that they only function when attached to a weapon of at least X quality (which interestingly means you can still attach them when they won't function), however in the case of a +1/MW weapon and a lesser crystal (requires +1) there is no ruling as to what happens.
My interpretation is that it is attached to a +1 weapon to the crystal will function for both ends, but a good case can be made both ways so this comes down to DM's call.

[Afghanistan]

Q 603

The Hardening spell on page 109 - 110 of the Spell Compendium has a blurb at the bottom of the spells about the following:

This spell affects up to 10 cubic feet of material per level of the caster. If cast upon a metal or mineral, the spell affects only 1 cubic foot per level.

However it has a material component of:

Material Component: An ointment made with 50 gp of diamond dust per 10 cubic feet of material.

Assuming a base of 10 cubic feet effected (it's cast as a 6th level Wizard spell for a minimum caster level of 11), would I only need to spend 50gp if I am affecting a metal or mineral to effect 10 cubic feet of metal and/or mineral, and at 20th caster level, another 50gp (100g) to effect another 10 cubic feet of metal and/or mineral?

[lylsyly]

Q 604: Dragon Compendium say Tibbits get ANY for bonus languages. BY RAW would this inlude Druidic?

[newguydude1]

q 605

animate weapon from complete mage. can i cast it on a colossal sized weapon and concentrate on it indefinitely at level 5?

[Thurbane]

Q 604: Dragon Compendium say Tibbits get ANY for bonus languages. BY RAW would this inlude Druidic?

A 604

From a strictly RAW reading, yes. It lacks the "other than secret languages such as Druidic" clause that is present on Humans and other races in their racial traits sections.

It was not addressed in errata, either.

Side note: Dvati, also in Dragon Compendium, share this trait.

[ChudoJogurt]

q 606
By RAW, what happens after you character dies and isn't resurrected?
As in, do you start a new character of the same level? Level-1? Level 1?
Or is it not covered by RAW at all?

[Troacctid]

q 605

animate weapon from complete mage. can i cast it on a colossal sized weapon and concentrate on it indefinitely at level 5?

Here is the potential pitfall.

Treat a light weapon as an object two size categories smaller than its wielder, a one-handed weapon as one size category smaller than its wielder, and a two-handed weapon as an object of the same size as its wielder.

The handedness of a weapon is affected by its size. For example, if you're a Medium creature, a one-handed weapon sized for a Large creature is a two-handed weapon for you. The same weapon sized for a Huge creature, however, could not be wielded at all.

So if you're a Medium creature and you want to cast this spell on a Colossal weapon, the type of animated object it should be treated as is not defined by the spell. That means it's up to the DM to fill in the gaps. "It's Colossal (because that's the physical size of the object)" and "It's an illegal target for the spell (because for you, it's not actually considered a weapon)" would be the two most likely answers, and both are valid interpretations by RAW; expect table variation.

[newguydude1]

Here is the potential pitfall.

The handedness of a weapon is affected by its size. For example, if you're a Medium creature, a one-handed weapon sized for a Large creature is a two-handed weapon for you. The same weapon sized for a Huge creature, however, could not be wielded at all.

So if you're a Medium creature and you want to cast this spell on a Colossal weapon, the type of animated object it should be treated as is not defined by the spell. That means it's up to the DM to fill in the gaps. "It's Colossal (because that's the physical size of the object)" and "It's an illegal target for the spell (because for you, it's not actually considered a weapon)" would be the two most likely answers, and both are valid interpretations by RAW; expect table variation.

i dont think your correct. the "wielder" doesnt have to exist. the spell doesnt animate weapons relative to you.
the target is weapon touched. not weapon your wielding
a large onehanded weapon is medium to both the medium and large creature.
the "wielder" is not an entity that exists. a two handed weapon for a colossal creature is colossal sized because its treated as the same size as its "wielder".

unless i misread the spell and i can only animate weapons that i can wield or a creature is already wielding.

[ranagrande]

i dont think your correct. the "wielder" doesnt have to exist. the spell doesnt animate weapons relative to you.
the target is weapon touched. not weapon your wielding
a large onehanded weapon is medium to both the medium and large creature.
the "wielder" is not an entity that exists. a two handed weapon for a colossal creature is colossal sized because its treated as the same size as its "wielder".

unless i misread the spell and i can only animate weapons that i can wield or a creature is already wielding.

Unfortunately, I think that interpretation is correct. The size of the animated object is dependent on the relative size of the referenced wielder. And you have to be the wielder, since it specified that "A weapon held or carried by another creature can't be affected by this spell." The flavor text supports this, going so far as to say "Your weapon leaps from your hands."

From a strict RAW standpoint, the spell shouldn't work on a weapon unless you can wield it.

[newguydude1]

Unfortunately, I think that interpretation is correct. The size of the animated object is dependent on the relative size of the referenced wielder. And you have to be the wielder, since it specified that "A weapon held or carried by another creature can't be affected by this spell." The flavor text supports this, going so far as to say "Your weapon leaps from your hands."

From a strict RAW standpoint, the spell shouldn't work on a weapon unless you can wield it.

ok i understand.
"A weapon held or carried by another creature can't be affected by this spell."
means its either gotta be wielded by me or be not wielded at all.

A weapon’s size category isn’t the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon’s size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.

this is a general rule the spell is parroting. "intended wielder" is the important part".

i dont think from a raw standpoint the spell requires the weapon to have a wielder. the target is a weapon touched. the weapon size in the spell description is a copy and paste from the general rule so it doesnt really override or negate or replace the general rule.

so it all comes down to whether the spell requires the weapon to be wielded in order to be targeted by the spell, or for its effect to happen. the spell does not target wielded weapons only. by raw "intended wielder" i think is the winner because thats the general rule and the specific spell rule directly quotes only a part of it.

unless i am wrong. this is a raw thread so intent has no place, but i think by raw i am right?

[ranagrande]

ok i understand.
"A weapon held or carried by another creature can't be affected by this spell."
means its either gotta be wielded by me or be not wielded at all.



this is a general rule the spell is parroting. "intended wielder" is the important part".

i dont think from a raw standpoint the spell requires the weapon to have a wielder. the target is a weapon touched. the weapon size in the spell description is a copy and paste from the general rule so it doesnt really override or negate or replace the general rule.

so it all comes down to whether the spell requires the weapon to be wielded in order to be targeted by the spell, or for its effect to happen. the spell does not target wielded weapons only. by raw "intended wielder" i think is the winner because thats the general rule and the specific spell rule directly quotes only a part of it.

unless i am wrong. this is a raw thread so intent has no place, but i think by raw i am right?

As you say, the target is a weapon touched, and there is nothing to prevent you from casting the spell on a weapon that is not being wielded. However in that case it would have no effect because the size of the resulting animated object is dependent in part on the size of the wielder, which has to be you.

[gogogome]

As you say, the target is a weapon touched, and there is nothing to prevent you from casting the spell on a weapon that is not being wielded. However in that case it would have no effect because the size of the resulting animated object is dependent in part on the size of the wielder, which has to be you.

You misunderstood his argument.

The size of the animated object is dependent on the size of its intended wielder. This is a general rule found in the PHB.
The spell description is repeating only a part of this general rule.

Nothing in the spell description conflicts with the general rule. It is merely repeating it. Meaning the spell description does not require you to have a wielder. The size of the weapon is dependent on its intended wielder.

Think of it this way.
General Rule: Intended Wielder
Spell Text: Could be interpreted as both intended wielder or actual wielder.
Spell Text is 100% inside the General rule, so General Rule is still in effect.

[Troacctid]

Like I said, both readings are consistent with RAW, so it's up to the DM's discretion.

Further discussion of the nuances here would take us beyond the scope of this thread.

[gogogome]

Like I said, both readings are consistent with RAW, so it's up to the DM's discretion.

This is where I disagree. With RAW there is only one interpretation in this case. No DM discretion.

If a cleric casts animate objects on a weapon, do you use the weapon's size or the size based on its intended wielder? The answer is the latter because by RAW a weapon's size is keyed to its intended wielder. Full stop.

Likewise it is the same case for Animate Weapon. Nothing in the spell text conflicts with the general rule. There is no exception. Therefore the weapon's size is keyed to its intended wielder. Full stop. No DM discretion.

[ranagrande]

You misunderstood his argument.

The size of the animated object is dependent on the size of its intended wielder. This is a general rule found in the PHB.
The spell description is repeating only a part of this general rule.

Nothing in the spell description conflicts with the general rule. It is merely repeating it. Meaning the spell description does not require you to have a wielder. The size of the weapon is dependent on its intended wielder.

Think of it this way.
General Rule: Intended Wielder
Spell Text: Could be interpreted as both intended wielder or actual wielder.
Spell Text is 100% inside the General rule, so General Rule is still in effect.

That is a reasonable interpretation, but it's not RAW. The spell makes no mention of intended wielder, only the wielder. The spell quotes a general rule about weapon categories, but is doing so for the new purpose of determining the sizes of animated objects. The rules cover different things and must be considered independently. Perhaps the omission of the line about the intended wielder was intentional? Perhaps the similarity between the rules in coincidental? It doesn't matter for RAW in this case. Specific trumps general, and the spell effect requires a wielder.

[gogogome]

That is a reasonable interpretation, but it's not RAW. The spell makes no mention of intended wielder, only the wielder. The spell quotes a general rule about weapon categories, but is doing so for the new purpose of determining the sizes of animated objects. The rules cover different things and must be considered independently. Perhaps the omission of the line about the intended wielder was intentional? Perhaps the similarity between the rules in coincidental? It doesn't matter for RAW in this case. Specific trumps general, and the spell effect requires a wielder.

Perhaps we should make a new thread to discuss this. If you disagree with what I say next, then start a new thread and I will follow.

First, spell descriptions repeat general rules all the time.

The enhancement bonus provided by tortoise shell stacks with the target's natural armor bonus, but not with other enhancement bonuses to natural armor.

The enhancement bonus provided by toughen construct stacks with the target's natural armor bonus, but not with other enhancement bonuses to natural armor.

To claim the literal copy and paste of the general rule for weapon size categories is a separate new rule and everything is just a coincidence is quite the stretch.

Second, lets take your logic step by step.
1. The spell targets any weapon.
2. The spell does nothing on weapons held or carried by other creatures.
3. If the targeted weapon is not held or carried by other creatures it becomes animate
4. The animated weapon's size category is determined by its relation with its "wielder" and not its actual object size.

You're saying if the wizard targets a sword lying on the ground, the spell will do nothing because it does not have instructions on what happens when you target an unwielded weapon.

But this is incorrect because there are instructions. The unwielded weapon becomes animate. You just don't know what size category it will be treated as. So one could say whether the Colossal Weapon is treated as a Colossal, Gargantuan, or Huge object is DM's discretion.

To repeat, if we follow your line of reasoning, whether the weapon becomes animate or not is not up to DM discretion. Only its size category is. The weapon will become animate. Unattended weapons are not a failstate of the spell.

But this is also incorrect. Because if the specific rules don't cover the scenario at hand, we default to the general rules, which once again say the colossal weapon will be colossal sized.

[Thurbane]

After this much back and forth, it probably needs its own thread.

Q 607

The LA assignment thread got me wondering: the Desiccation ability of the Phiuhl (FF) - it inflicts negative levels without being called out as energy drain or negative energy. Does that mean Death Ward would offer no protection?

[magicalmagicman]

Q 608

Can you select a feat before choosing a class?

The PHB gives a numbered order of what to change if you level up, but it doesn't say you need to do them in order. And plenty of feats make skills class skills which means I can definitely choose feats before skills.

So following this, it makes sense I can select a PrC prerequisite feat first and then enter the PrC on the same level up. Not seeing anything that says I can't do this.