Simple RAW for 3.5: 38 pages, and I still don't know how to play D&D

[St Fan]

Q 11 b (a clarification in hopes for additional answer to clarify the previous answer)

Well, in this case, I have full wizard on one side and full ranger on the other. The main reason for wanting prestige is to speed through the prestige for certain features while also aiming for other wizard features on the other side of the gestalt.

A 11
As with the first response, this is possible, but anything redundant between the wizard level and the prestige class level won't stack up.
Especially not the spellcasting progression, even if the prestige class gives a "+1 level of existing arcane casting class".
A proper progression with a Gestalt character usually tries to avoid those wasteful redundancy.

[Bobur]

Q 12
Yuan Ti: produce acid? What action does it take to activate this and make the body acidic?
It says it becomes useless almost immediately, so is it only useful when already in a grapple or does that mean it stays for 1 round /trying a touch/grapple during that round or when being hit by a natural attack?
This ability confuses me as to how to use it.

[Beni-Kujaku]

A 12 The default activation action for SLAs is a standard action, except for SLAs reproducing spells with a shorter casting time. Thus, Produce Acid is a standard action. SLAs can be used while grappling (casting an SLA is like casting a spell with no component, and requires a Concentration check) and Produce Acid then deals 5d6 acid, which is higher than its bite attack and does not require attack rolls. Another use case is simply to cast it before combat and to have it active for the first attack of a fight.

[Jon_Dahl]

Q 13

You are in the Astral Plane and you enter a color pool that takes you to the Abyss. To which layer will you end up in? What determines the layer?

[Shinoskay]

Q 13

You are in the Astral Plane and you enter a color pool that takes you to the Abyss. To which layer will you end up in? What determines the layer?

A 13
A quick google search shows me that since AD&D it has been written that the astral plane borders the first layer of each outer plane.

the abyss is listed as an outer plane. there by you would enter the first layer of the abyss when using a method that naturally moves you through the astral planes border to an outer plane per AD&D (dunno if this carried over).

*edit
and actually, I found this wiki link here
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Astral_Plane
that suggests not only are they two way but they can be somewhat randomly linked to different places and parts of the plane the pool goes to. You can find out where your particular pools goes to, however, by concentrating into it to see.

[Vaern]

Q 14

A character uses the Combat Rhythm portion of the Stormguard Warrior feat, making three successful touch attacks against an opponent and dealing no damage but granting a +15 bonus to all melee damage rolls against that target on the following turn.
Oh his next turn he casts Red Fester, succeeding on a melee touch attack that deals 1d6 strength damage and 1d4 charisma damage to the same opponent.

Since Red Fester is delivered via a melee touch attack, will the strength and charisma damage it deals be considered melee damage for the purpose of benefiting from the +15 bonus to melee damage rolls granted by Combat Rhythm?

[St Fan]

Q 14

A character uses the Combat Rhythm portion of the Stormguard Warrior feat, making three successful touch attacks against an opponent and dealing no damage but granting a +15 bonus to all melee damage rolls against that target on the following turn.
Oh his next turn he casts Red Fester, succeeding on a melee touch attack that deals 1d6 strength damage and 1d4 charisma damage to the same opponent.

Since Red Fester is delivered via a melee touch attack, will the strength and charisma damage it deals be considered melee damage for the purpose of benefiting from the +15 bonus to melee damage rolls granted by Combat Rhythm?

A 14
If I'm not mistaken, from the Rules Compendium, the rules for weaponlike spells specifies that, for ability damage, only critical hits can increase them beyond what the spell normally inflict.

At best, this bonus to melee damage can be treated like precision damage, which for a weaponlike spell delivering ability damage means that the additional damage is treated as negative energy hit points damage, not further ability damage.

(By the by, your first link doesn't work, and anyway I believe you're not supposed to link to D&D tools at all since it isn't an official site.)

[Beni-Kujaku]

A 14 additional Actually, Rules Compendium says that no feat, except for a select few from Core listed on p.132, can modify weaponlike spells in any way. Even then, the one feat in the list that should increase damage (Point-Blank Shot) only works for hit point damage and not ability damage (though ability damage ranged touch spells still gain the +1 to hit) and Weapon Specialization cannot be chosen at all, despite being a "combat-enhancing feat" from Core.
I personally think it is perfectly reasonable to add other feats from outside Core to this list, but then this isn't RAW anymore, and I believe it is quite clear that, RAI, it shouldn't be possible to increase ability score damage on weaponlike spells.

[St Fan]

Q 15

Exploit Adjustment [General]

Your skill at finding and exploiting opportunities is such that you can find openings in even the smallest movements.
Prerequisite: Int 13, Canny Opportunist, Combat Expertise.
Benefit: You may make an attack of opportunity against any opponent who moves from one square adjacent to you to
another square adjacent to you.
Normal: Taking a 5-foot step does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Special: A fighter may select Exploit Adjustment as one of his fighter bonus feats.

This feat is clearly aimed at countering five-foot steps... however, as written, does it also...

A) ... allow one to make an attack of opportunity against an opponent using Spring Attack, even if you're the targeted defender of the feat?

B) If you have both Exploit Adjustment and Combat Reflexes, can you make several attacks of opportunity against someone moving over several squares adjacent to you, unlike normal circumstances precluding the same move from provoking more than one AoO?

[glass]

Q 15This feat is clearly aimed at countering five-foot steps... however, as written, does it also...

A) ... allow one to make an attack of opportunity against an opponent using Spring Attack, even if you're the targeted defender of the feat?

A15A: AFAICT, yes. With the caveat that it only works if the squares the target moves to and from are both adjacent to you, which is probably somewhat unlikely with Spring Attack.

B) If you have both Exploit Adjustment and Combat Reflexes, can you make several attacks of opportunity against someone moving over several squares adjacent to you, unlike normal circumstances precluding the same move from provoking more than one AoO?

A15B: No, there is nothing in the feat that overrides the once-per rule for movement AoOs.

[Shinoskay]

Q 15



This feat is clearly aimed at countering five-foot steps... however, as written, does it also...

A) ... allow one to make an attack of opportunity against an opponent using Spring Attack, even if you're the targeted defender of the feat?

B) If you have both Exploit Adjustment and Combat Reflexes, can you make several attacks of opportunity against someone moving over several squares adjacent to you, unlike normal circumstances precluding the same move from provoking more than one AoO?

A 15

from one square adjacent to you to another square adjacent to you.

you make an attack of opportunity against someone anytime that line of text occurs.
there is no stipulation, there is no limitation within the text.

So long as you have an attack of opportunity left, and they do that act, you may use one as that text has now been appended into the provoking attack of opportunity mechanics for you. it is now a specific rule to the general, for you.

to be clear, it is clearly adding to when you are allowed to use trigger an attack of opportunity, and it clearly says 'an enemy' does the action.

this includes if they use spring attack, or move from one adjacent square to the next more than once. the only time it wouldnt is if they use something that says they cannot be targeted by attacks of opportunity while using it (like tumble).

the same as for if someone decided to shoot multiple arrows while standing next to someone with multiple attacks of opportunity. each shot is a triggering action as a rule.

however, if they spring attack you and then step away to a square that is not adjacent, then the feat does not permit you the specific rule... and you revert back to the general rule for attacks of opportunity.

It seems I am incorrect, I did not know about a rule compodium rule that adds a once per reason per person stipulation to all attack of opportunity situations; https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questi...-from-the-same (Rules Compendium (page 19)

Some abilities allow you to make more than one attack of opportunity per round. Most such abilities, unless they say otherwise, don’t let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity. If the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, however, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity. Each provoking act represents a different opportunity.

[loky1109]

Q16
If I have only 1 skill point per level, could I get skill trick by two level ups?

[Vaern]

A 16

No. The rules for acquiring skills say that you must spend all of your skill points and that you can not save them for later. A character who only gains one skill point per level can not save up the two skill points necessary to learn a skill trick.

[St Fan]

A 16

No. The rules for acquiring skills say that you must spend all of your skill points and that you can not save them for later. A character who only gains one skill point per level can not save up the two skill points necessary to learn a skill trick.

A 16 addition
Vaern is correct. I just want to add you can circumvent the problem with the retraining rules from Player's Handbook II, which allow to pick up to 4 skill ranks already spent and redistribute them; this can be used to gain a skill trick. But that's the only way skill points can be "saved for later".
(Also, retraining is done right at the level change, meaning you must fit the prerequisites already, before anything is gained from the new level.)

Edit: And there's also the Open Minded feat, which can grant 5 skill ranks in one go. Of which 2 can be used for a skill trick. (The rule that only one trick can be gained at a given level probably still apply, though.)

[St Fan]

Q 17

A character from a race with a high Level Adjustment (let's say, a firbolg) is turned into a race with LA +0 (let's say human) by some powerful magic (probably polymorph any object).

Said character then go adventuring for several years under this lower from, gaining XP and several class levels in the process.

Then the race-changing magic is dispelled, and she turn back into her true form with full Level Adjustment.

How does that impact her current class level and XP total?

[Beni-Kujaku]

A 17 There are multiple instances of characters jumping ECL in the rules (Emancipated Spawn, application of a template, or application of incarnate Construct or Shaper of Form when having already some LA). In none of these cases is there any mention of levels being gained or lost, and it is even explicitly stated that all levels are conserved
in Emancipated Spawn. So, it seems pretty clear that you keep all your levels, but it is very unclear what happens to your XP. Does it stay the same (nothing says it should change, so I guess it is the RAW answer, but then you should immediately gain several levels when reducing your ECL, which seems contrary to the intent), do you gain just enough XP to reach your new level (like the Deck of Many Things does), are you set at the midpoint of your new level (what happens generally when you lose a level from negative level or from death) ? Unclear ! Ask your DM.

[Shinoskay]

Q 18

In a gestalt

would a level 10 wizard gestalted with ranger who has does Improved Spellcasting (Ex) and sword of the arcane order stack?

Would the caster level be 10/10? 10/20? or something else?

[Morphic tide]

A 18: Improved Spellcasting sets your Ranger caster level to 1/2 Ranger level+2+Arcane caster levels, while Sword of the Arcane Order adds your Ranger class level to your Wizard CL. So the answer seems to be Wizard CL 20/Ranger CL 27, as you have 10 levels of Wizard for "base" CL 10, 10 levels of Ranger for "base" CL 7, then add your Ranger class level to Wizard for CL 20, followed by adding this CL 20 to Ranger CL 7.

[glass]

A18 dispute. The gestalt rules could be more precise, but IMNSHO it is pretty clear that you don't get to stack both sides of the progression on anything. No counting Ranger levels for Wizard or Wizard levels for Ranger, unless they are genuinely different levels.

But ask your GM.

[Pinkie Pyro]

Q 19

one of the wizard specialist alternate class feature for the 'high conjurer' is the following:

Spontaneous Summoning (Ex): Conjurers using this variant can "lose" a prepared spell to cast any summon monster spell of a lower level. For example, a conjurer who has prepared greater invisibility (a 4th-level spell) may lose that spell to cast summon monster I, summon monster II, or summon monster III.

A conjurer using this variant does not gain additional spells per day for being a specialist wizard.

Would having this feature allow you to use 'summon monster' spells without having them in your spellbook as a wizard?

[Duke of Urrel]

Q 19

Would having [the extraordinary alternative class feature Spontaneous Summoning] allow you to use 'summon monster' spells without having them in your spellbook as a wizard?

A 19

No, it wouldn't.

By default, if you are a wizard and you know a spell, the reason is that you have at one time copied it into your spellbook. Even the Read Magic spell, which every wizard can prepare without referring to their spellbook, appears in the wizard's spellbook, because: "A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells..."

Since Spontaneous Summoning does not change this general rule, every Summon Monster spell that this alternative class feature enables you to cast spontaneously instead of a prepared spell must still appear in your spellbook.

(This is an easy requirement to satisfy, because as a wizard, you get two new spells written in your spellbook for free every time you advance a level.)

[Troacctid]

Q 19

one of the wizard specialist alternate class feature for the 'high conjurer' is the following:



Would having this feature allow you to use 'summon monster' spells without having them in your spellbook as a wizard?

There is no such class as "High Conjurer" in this edition (at least, not in 1st party material). However, the ability you're quoting appears to work the same way as the Specialist Wizard Variants (UA).

Assuming you are using the UA variant, yes, it will allow you to cast Summon Monster spells spontaneously even if you don't have them in your spellbook; this is an exception to the usual rules for wizard casting. Note though that you will not be able to prepare the spells the normal way unless you learn them properly! The exception applies only to the spontaneous casting ability.

[Morphic tide]

Q 20
Deeply mad wording abuse:

After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

Does this mean you technically conclude a Standard Action "Attack" before you begin taking the Full-Round Action "Full Attack"? Because if that is the case, then Spring Attack, and thus Rapid Blitz, being tied to the "attack action" is technically valid to do as the first attack within a Full Attack before you actually declare it a "Full Attack" with the movement restrictions, assuming that never saw errata despite Bounding Assault/Rapid Blitz.

This is incredibly obviously not intended, given the strange BAB+Iterative+Rapid Blitz baseline of +18/+13/+8/+13/+8/+3, but it does seem to be a defensible interpretation of the excerpt's wording.

[Duke of Urrel]

Q 20

Does this mean you technically conclude a Standard Action "Attack" before you begin taking the Full-Round Action "Full Attack"?

A 20

No, it doesn't.


The text you quoted allows you to change your mind in the middle of a full attack action, so that instead of making two or more attacks before your turn ends, you make only one attack (which counts as a standard action) and then take a move action. (If you already took a five-foot step before you attacked, you have to use your move action for something other than moving.) But the feats that you mentioned don't involve full attack actions.

Whether you use the Spring Attack feat, the Bounding Assault feat, or the Rapid Blitz feat, you always take one standard action and one move action. You always attack with your standard action and move with your move action.

When you use the Spring Attack feat, you split your move action in two, so that you move both before and after you attack, and you provoke no attack of opportunity from your chosen opponent. (Your total movement allowance is still the same as one standard move.)

When you use the Bounding Assault feat, you can make two attacks with your standard attack action, and you can use these attacks to attack either two opponents once or one opponent twice. Thus, if you choose, you can move, attack Opponent #1, move again without provoking an attack of opportunity from Opponent #1, attack Opponent #2 (adding your BAB -5), and move again (within your movement limit). Or if you choose, you can move, attack one opponent twice (the second time at BAB -5), and move again without provoking an attack of opportunity from this opponent.

The Rapid Blitz feat works just like the Bounding Assault feat, except that you can make three attacks with your standard attack action, and you can divide these attacks among up to three opponents. The attacks add your BAB, your BAB -5, and your BAB -10, respectively. You don't provoke any attacks of opportunity when you move away from these three opponents.

[Morphic tide]

A 20

No, it doesn't.


The text you quoted allows you to change your mind in the middle of a full attack action, so that instead of making two or more attacks before your turn ends, you make only one attack (which counts as a standard action) and then take a move action. (If you already took a five-foot step before you attacked, you have to use your move action for something other than moving.) But the feats that you mentioned don't involve full attack actions.

A 20 dispute: You make your first attack, then only after that you decide if you're making a "Full Attack". Your proposed contradiction requires the decision point be placed differently from the plain text. My own interpretation to close it is that you make that first attack with an indeterminate action, such that if you've concluded a Rapid Blitz's "Attack" action you no longer have a Standard Action to follow through into a "Full Attack", but it does appear a semantically-valid albeit very strange parsing of what is written as far as the SRD is concerned.

Whether you use the Spring Attack feat, the Bounding Assault feat, or the Rapid Blitz feat, you always take one standard action and one move action. You always attack with your standard action and move with your move action.

When you use the Spring Attack feat, you split your move action in two, so that you move both before and after you attack, and you provoke no attack of opportunity from your chosen opponent. (Your total movement allowance is still the same as one standard move.)

When you use the Bounding Assault feat, you can make two attacks with your standard attack action, and you can use these attacks to attack either two opponents once or one opponent twice. Thus, if you choose, you can move, attack Opponent #1, move again without provoking an attack of opportunity from Opponent #1, attack Opponent #2 (adding your BAB -5), and move again (within your movement limit). Or if you choose, you can move, attack one opponent twice (the second time at BAB -5), and move again without provoking an attack of opportunity from this opponent.

The Rapid Blitz feat works just like the Bounding Assault feat, except that you can make three attacks with your standard attack action, and you can divide these attacks among up to three opponents. The attacks add your BAB, your BAB -5, and your BAB -10, respectively. You don't provoke any attacks of opportunity when you move away from these three opponents.

A 20 dispute contintued: Absolutely nothing about what was written down mandates this, actually. Spring Attack just says you move "up to your speed" split before and after your "attack action", with no reference in any way to the "Move" action in specific or Move Actions as a whole. It is perfectly valid to read that movement as strictly modifying the Attack action. Unless you have a rules or errata citation to show otherwise, this is vastly more grounded than many widely-accepted RAW abuses, no matter how much Rapid Blitz indicates it should be otherwise.

[Duke of Urrel]

A 20 dispute: You make your first attack, then only after that you decide if you're making a "Full Attack". Your proposed contradiction requires the decision point be placed differently from the plain text. My own interpretation to close it is that you make that first attack with an indeterminate action, such that if you've concluded a Rapid Blitz's "Attack" action you no longer have a Standard Action to follow through into a "Full Attack", but it does appear a semantically-valid albeit very strange parsing of what is written as far as the SRD is concerned.


A 20 dispute contintued: Absolutely nothing about what was written down mandates this, actually. Spring Attack just says you move "up to your speed" split before and after your "attack action", with no reference in any way to the "Move" action in specific or Move Actions as a whole. It is perfectly valid to read that movement as strictly modifying the Attack action. Unless you have a rules or errata citation to show otherwise, this is vastly more grounded than many widely-accepted RAW abuses, no matter how much Rapid Blitz indicates it should be otherwise.

A 20 Discussion

Do we really understand each other?

The text that we are discussing appears on page 143 of the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK v. 3.5 under its own heading.

Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.

At this point, the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK has already discussed standard actions (pages 139 to 142) and move actions (pages 142 to 143). The heading "Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack" indicates that you can sometimes choose to make an attack as a standard action instead of a full attack as a full-round action. You can never choose to take both an attack and a full attack in one round. You must always decide between these two options.

The necessary background to interpreting this text is the awareness that you have the following options:

1. Take one full-round action (such as a full attack action including all your iterative attacks).
2. Take one standard action (such as a single attack) and then one move action (for example "moving your speed" or some other action, such as opening a door).
3. Take one move action and then one standard action.
4. Take two different move actions consecutively.
5. Take one five-foot step and then a full-round action (in which case you do not have the option of taking a move action after you make a single attack).

As I interpret the passage quoted above, all that the writers of the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK are trying to tell us is that you don't have to decide whether your character is taking a standard-action attack or a full-round-action attack until after you have made one attack and know its outcome. For example, suppose you can make two iterative attacks as a full attack action. Suppose you already have an enemy within reach of your longsword: an orc. And suppose you use the first of your iterative attacks to try to hit the orc with your longsword.

• Option 1: If this attack fails, you may choose to make your second attack against the orc, because you don't want to move on until the orc has dropped. If you do this, your turn is taken up by one full attack action.
• Option 2: If your first attack succeeds and the orc drops, you may choose not to take your second attack. Instead, you may choose to move, so that you are in a better position when your next turn begins. If you do this, your turn is taken up by one standard-action attack followed by one move action.

All that the writers mean to tell us is this: if you are a character capable of making two or more iterative attacks in a full attack action, you don't have to commit to choosing either a standard-action attack or a full-round-action attack until after your first attack is complete. But you do have to commit to one or the other after your first attack is complete; you can never choose both.

Neither the text quoted above, nor any text written anywhere else in the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK, changes this.

Now, the Spring Attack feat (which appears in the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK II v. 3.5) does change something. It enables you to split your move, so that you move part of your speed before you attack and then move the rest of your speed after you attack. This does not lengthen your move; you are still limited to the distance that we call your "speed," which is the distance that you can normally move when you take a move action. Thus, if your speed is 30 feet, you can move 15 feet, attack an orc, and then move another 15 feet, but no farther. You also provoke no attack of opportunity from the orc when you move away from him.

The Bounding Assault feat works just like the Spring Attack feat, but it allows you to take two attacks (the first at your BAB, the second at your BAB -5) and divide them between two opponents, and you provoke no attack of opportunity when you move away from either one of them. Your standard action now includes two iterative attacks instead of one (nice!), but your move is the same as with the Spring Attack feat.

The Rapid Blitz feat works just like the Bounding Assault feat, but it allows you to take three attacks (the first at your BAB, the second at your BAB -5, and the third at your BAB -10) and divide them among three opponents, and you provoke no attack of opportunity when you move away from any one of them. Your standard action now includes three iterative attacks instead of one or two (really nice!), but your move is still the same as with the Spring Attack feat.

There is no "mandate" to interpret the rules in this manner, but I know of no other way to make sense of them. I suppose you could say that when you use one of these feats (Spring Attack, Bounding Assault, or Rapid Blitz), both your move and your attacks can be counted together as one full-round action, but there is no "mandate" for this, either. It makes more sense to do this with the Charge attack, which is explicitly classified as a full-round action, because the move included in the charge is unusual (you move "twice your speed") and restricted (you can move only in an unobstructed straight line). This is not true of the move that you make when you use the Spring Attack, Bounding Assault, or Rapid Blitz feat. This is just a standard move that you take to "move your speed," as usual.

I don't intend to "mandate" anything here. I only intend to make sense of the rules. If others can accomplish this better than I can, I warmly invite them to do just that.

[Beni-Kujaku]

This seems outside the realm of "simple RAW". If you want to keep discussing this‚ please create a new thread.

[St Fan]

Q 21

With the Great Throw feat, on a successful trip attack "you deal your normal unarmed strike damage to the opponent".

Since Improved Unarmed Strike normally allows to choose between nonlethal and normal damage, can a Great Throw attack be used for nonlethal damage?

[Chronos]

A 21:

Yes, if you have Improved Unarmed Strike, you could choose either.

[Yora]

Q22: Does the designation of certain spell-like abilities as Psionics in the Monster Manual have any mechanical implications or consequences? Is there anything about them that works different from other spell-like abilities?