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

[newguydude1]

q 690

A sorcerer can obtain a familiar. Doing so takes 24 hours and uses up magical materials that cost 100 gp. A familiar is a magical beast that resembles a small animal and is unusually tough and intelligent. The creature serves as a companion and servant.

do these 24 hours have to be consecutive uninterrupted hours or can it be spaced out across several days?

[Duke of Urrel]

q 690

do these 24 hours have to be consecutive uninterrupted hours or can it be spaced out across several days?

A 690

The rules don't say.

Not only do the rules have nothing to say about whether finding a familiar is an activity that can be interrupted or not, they also have nothing to say about whether staying awake for 24 hours causes you to suffer fatigue. The rules do say that creatures of some creature types (such as the Humanoid type) need sleep, but they don't provide rules to determine what, if anything, you must suffer if you miss a lot of sleep.

If staying awake for 24 hours causes you no disadvantage, then why not just perform the familiar-finding activity in 24 hours straight and get it over with? The only reason not to do this would be a house rule imposed by your dungeon master regarding fatigue from lack of sleep.

On the other hand, the rules don't say that you can't interrupt the 24-hour activity that you must perform in order to find a familiar. They don't even specify what this activity is. Maybe it only involves sitting quietly in a wilderness area and trying to establish an Empathic Link with a wild creature. Maybe you only need to do this for one hour a day for 24 days, or for two hours a day for 12 days, or for three hours a day for eight days. The rules have nothing to say about this.

In conclusion, all that I can advise is that you ask your dungeon master.

[newguydude1]

q 691

if you stack 3 power word pains on a creature, does the creature take 3d6 damage a turn or just 1d6 damage a turn?

[St Fan]

q 691

if you stack 3 power word pains on a creature, does the creature take 3d6 damage a turn or just 1d6 damage a turn?

Spells don't stack with themselves unless specified in their description, bar a few specific exceptions (for example instantaneous effects).

Casting several times the same spell doesn't have stacking effects (the damage stay 1d6 a turn), it just resets the duration to the one of the latest spell cast

[Saintheart]

Fifty page mark, guys, shouldn't there be a new thread?

[bean illus]

Question 692
Quicken Spell declares that since it's a free action, you can cast another spell that round.

Can you also cast an immediate action spell? A swift? A standard? All of them?

[Troacctid]

Question 692
Quicken Spell declares that since it's a free action, you can cast another spell that round.

Can you also cast an immediate action spell? A swift? A standard? All of them?

A quickened spell uses your swift action for the turn, which means you cannot also cast another swift or immediate action spell that turn. Your other actions are available normally for spellcasting, so you are free to spend your standard or full-round action to cast another spell.

[newguydude1]

q 693

To prepare her daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but she must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If her rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time she has to rest in order to clear her mind, and she must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing her spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, she still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells.

does this mean that a wizard can
rest for 2 hours (6 hours left)
get interrupted and do something for 8 hours (7hours left)
rest for 2 hours (5 hours left)
get interrupted and do something for 8 hours (6hours left)
...
until she fulfills the full hours left?

in other words instead of 8 hours of rest, its 16 hours of rest in 2 hours intervals throughout the week.

[Thurbane]

A quickened spell uses your swift action for the turn, which means you cannot also cast another swift or immediate action spell that turn. Your other actions are available normally for spellcasting, so you are free to spend your standard or full-round action to cast another spell.

A 692 additional info:

When the 3.5 PHB came out, there was no swift or immediate actions; after they were introduced (in the Miniatures Handbook), Quicken Spell was errata'd to change spells to a swift action, rather than a free action.

[newguydude1]

q 694

does being unconscious count as resting? even when handled like being bound and taken somewhere?

[Yael]

695 A Shapechanged wizard could use the Free Metamagic (Su) ability from a Tome Dragon^DM343 when preparing spells?

[Saintheart]

A 695 By the most narrow RAW -- yes. Whilst the RAI was that Free Metamagic was only meant to have applied to the dragon's Sorcerer casting, nothing in the entries prevents that (Su) ability from applying to spells prepared by a Shapechanged caster, assuming he can stay in that form long enough to prepare the spell and cast it.

[St Fan]

Q 696

I guess that conditions caused by the same source don't stack; however what about the same condition caused by different sources?

For example, if a character is struck by a Sickening Strike (ambush feat causing the sickened state through pain) while under the effect of stolen breath (spell causing the sickened state through respiratory distress), would the penalties stack?

[Khedrac]

A 696 No, or rather not in this case.

For example, if a character is struck by a Sickening Strike (ambush feat causing the sickened state through pain) while under the effect of stolen breath (spell causing the sickened state through respiratory distress), would the penalties stack?

In this case netiher the spell nor the attack apply penalties, instead they both apply a condition - and "Sickened" is an on/off condition - you cannot be double sickened. Some things that inflict the sickened condition state that you become nauseated if already sickened, but not all of them and it is not a general rule.

All that said, it two different sources apply the same penalty (e.g. -2 to "to hit") then the penalties will stack unless something specifies otherwise.

[bean illus]

Question 692 B. Follow up question, please.

Question 692
Quicken Spell declares that since it's a free action, you can cast another spell that round.

Can you also cast an immediate action spell? A swift? A standard? All of them?

A quickened spell uses your swift action for the turn, which means you cannot also cast another swift or immediate action spell that turn. Your other actions are available normally for spellcasting, so you are free to spend your standard or full-round action to cast another spell.

A 692 additional info:

When the 3.5 PHB came out, there was no swift or immediate actions; after they were introduced (in the Miniatures Handbook), Quicken Spell was errata'd to change spells to a swift action, rather than a free action.

So, a character can't use an immediate action if he's already used a swift action? When can it be used, on another's turn?

Can one cast a swift or immediate spell during standard action, if they choose?

Official online srd isn't clearing it up for me. Please and thanks.

[Troacctid]

Question 692 B. Follow up question, please.







So, a character can't use an immediate action if he's already used a swift action? When can it be used, on another's turn?

Can one cast a swift or immediate spell during standard action, if they choose?

Official online srd isn't clearing it up for me. Please and thanks.

An immediate action is a special type of swift action that can be used even when it's not your turn. If you use an immediate action on your turn, it is simply a swift action. If you use it on someone else's turn, it counts as your swift action for your next turn. So while you couldn't use a swift and immediate action in one turn, you could use a swift action and then, on the next initiative count, use the immediate action. Then when the round comes all the way back to you again, your swift action for the turn will have already been used up. Make sense?

[Thurbane]

Q 697

Question about Beguilers, Gatekeeper Initiate Feat, and Domain Staffs.

The Gatekeeper Initiate feat says:

In addition, you can cast the following spells as if they were on the druid spell list at the indicated level.

Say a Beguiler takes this feat, and has a Domain Staff containing one or more of the spells listed in the Gatekeeper Initiate feat. Can he use his spell slots to cast those spells from the staff?

By expending a prepared divine spell or divine spell slot, the wielder can "cast" a spell of the same level or lower from the runestaff’s list, as long as that spell also appears on the wielder’s divine class spell list (including his domain lists, if any).

Q 697B

If no, would using the Southern Magician feat allow this to work?

[Saintheart]

A 697
No. The Gatekeeper Initiate feat provides that you may cast those spells as if they were on the druid spell list at the indicated level. The spells are not actually added to the druid list. A domain staff only permits a spell to be cast "as long as that spell also appears on the wielder’s divine class spell list (including his domain lists, if any)." The spells do not appear on the wielder's divine class spell list and accordingly you can't cast them from a domain staff.


A 697B
No, for the same reasons as 697. The problem is that Gatekeeper Initiate only allows you to cast spells as if they were on the druid spell list, it does not add them to the list.

[Vaern]

Q698
Can familiars and animal companions benefit from consumables that their master uses, such as potions, with the share spells ability?

[St Fan]

Q698
Can familiars and animal companions benefit from consumables that their master uses, such as potions, with the share spells ability?

A 698

A good question. The description of the share spell ability, both for familiars and animal companions, specifies "any spell (but not any spell-like ability) he casts on himself also affect..."

Potions are not spells cast by the master, so they wouldn't affect the companion. Said companion can imbibe a potion separately, of course, and it'll work as long as the potion can affect its type.

The question would be trickier with scrolls or wands, though. I would have to look at it closer and makes a GM call.

[ixrisor]

Q698 dispute

A 698
Potions are not spells cast by the master, so they wouldn't affect the companion.

This is incorrect, despite the caster level and any decisions in the spell being set by the crafter of the potion:

The drinker of a potion is both the effective target and the caster of the effect

As the drinker is the caster, share spells should work.

[Yael]

Q699 Spells converted to Supernatural abilities (from the Dweomerkeeper's Supernatural Spell) cost any component (Material, Focus or Exp)?

Q700 Does the Dweomerkeeper's Supernatural Spell works with epic spells?

Q700ª If Q699 is "no", and Q700 is "yes", would the XP cost from epic spells also be removed?

[St Fan]

Q699 Spells converted to Supernatural abilities (from the Dweomerkeeper's Supernatural Spell) cost any component (Material, Focus or Exp)?

Q700 Does the Dweomerkeeper's Supernatural Spell works with epic spells?

Q700ª If Q699 is "no", and Q700 is "yes", would the XP cost from epic spells also be removed?

A 699 Supernatural Spell waves ALL components of a spell. That includes vocal, somatic and material components, but also focus or XP components, indeed. In fact, even more esoteric components like disease/drug/demon/devil/fiend/location/soul/undead (Book of Vile Darkness) or abstinence/archon/celestial (Book of Exalted Deeds) would be waved too, as long as they are listed under "components".

(The ones that are contentious are Corrupt or Sacrifice components, because those happen when the spell expires and not when it is cast; expect GM variation on this point.)

A 700 Nothing in the Dweomerkeeper ability nor the Epic Spells description would prevent it, although only for epic spells that have a casting time of 1 standard action or less.

Thus the few epic spells that have material or XP components could be cast for free this way, but again only if their casting time is no more than a standard action. Most epic spells requiring a ritual component have a longer casting time.

Note also this changes nothing to the development cost of an epic spell.

[St Fan]

Q698 dispute

This is incorrect, despite the caster level and any decisions in the spell being set by the crafter of the potion:

The drinker of a potion is both the effective target and the caster of the effect

As the drinker is the caster, share spells should work.

The drinker is the "effective caster of the effect", true. However, the Share Spells ability clearly specifies:

"any spell (but not any spell-like ability) she casts upon herself"

The drinker of a potion is not "casting a spell" himself, he's receiving a spell effect. The interpretation is contentious to what exactly "casting a spell" implies (and the ability specifically excludes spell-like ability, hinting it is already limited in scope). By a strict interpretation, only spells the master CAST himself are concerned, excluding every magical items.

[ixrisor]

The drinker of a potion is not "casting a spell" himself, he's receiving a spell effect. The interpretation is contentious to what exactly "casting a spell" implies (and the ability specifically excludes spell-like ability, hinting it is already limited in scope). By a strict interpretation, only spells the master CAST himself are concerned, excluding every magical items.

The drinker is the caster of the spell, and it’s subject. Share spells requires the caster to target himself, in other words, to both be the caster and the subject. Share spells doesn’t disallow spells cast via magic items, therefore I see no reason why it would not work, apart from possibly common sense. If you want to continue this discussion, I think it would be a good idea to pm me or start a new thread.

[Vaern]

A 698

A good question. The description of the share spell ability, both for familiars and animal companions, specifies "any spell (but not any spell-like ability) he casts on himself also affect..."

Potions are not spells cast by the master, so they wouldn't affect the companion. Said companion can imbibe a potion separately, of course, and it'll work as long as the potion can affect its type.

The question would be trickier with scrolls or wands, though. I would have to look at it closer and makes a GM call.

The description on potions says that they are "like spells cast upon the imbiber," with the imbiber being designated both the caster and target for the purposes of the spell.
The general description of scrolls describes them as "basically like casting a spell," and that spells activated from a scroll "work exactly like a spell prepared and cast the normal way."
Wands and staves both include the phrase, "casting a spell from a [wand/staff] is usually a standard action," which leaves basically zero ambiguity that it is a spell being cast.

All three appear to function as though the user is actually casting a spell.

[St Fan]

The description on potions says that they are "like spells cast upon the imbiber," with the imbiber being designated both the caster and target for the purposes of the spell.
The general description of scrolls describes them as "basically like casting a spell," and that spells activated from a scroll "work exactly like a spell prepared and cast the normal way."
Wands and staves both include the phrase, "casting a spell from a [wand/staff] is usually a standard action," which leaves basically zero ambiguity that it is a spell being cast.

All three appear to function as though the user is actually casting a spell.

Interesting, but please note that "works like", "basically like" and "appear to function as though" still doesn't equate precisely to "casting a spell".

Drinking a potion isn't casting a spell, it's consuming a use-activated item.

Activating a wand isn't casting a spell, it's using a spell trigger item.

Reading a scroll isn't casting a spell, it's using a spell completion item.

My full counter will be another question:

Q 701

A) If a wizard drinks a potion, then casts the spell mnemonic enhancer the next round, does the spell contained in the potion will be "restored to his mind" and thus prepared for the next 24 hours?

B) If a wizard activates a scroll, then cast mage's lucubration the same day, is the spell that was written on the scroll "restored to his mind" and thus prepared and ready to be cast?

C) Even, in either case, if said spell is not on his spell list, not an arcane spell, or too high level for him?

[Thurbane]

Q 702

If I modify a Cone of Cold spells with both the City Spell and Lord of the Uttercold metamagic feats, what % of the damage is cold, what % "city", and what % negative?

Does it matter the order in which I apply the metamagic?

[Venger]

A 702 The spell would deal 50% city damage and 50% negative energy damage.

No.

[Thurbane]

A 702 The spell would deal 50% city damage and 50% negative energy damage.

No.

Are you sure?

City Magic changes half of the energy (cold, in this case) damage of a spell to city damage.

Lord of the Uttercold changes half of the cold damage to negative energy damage.

I don't see how the cold damage is removed altogether.

Depending on the order the feats are applies, I would have thought the damage would be 50% city, 25% cold and 25% negative (City Magic > Lord of the Uttercold); or 50% negative, 25% cold and 25% city (Lord of the Uttercold > City Magic).