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

[loky1109]

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?

A22: creatures with such abilities could take and use psionic feats.

[Chronos]

A 22 continued:
And in general they'd all have the [Psionic] subtype. Being able to take psionic feats is the most significant implication of that subtype, but there are a few others.

[Vaern]

A 22

Within the context of just the core rules, there is no difference between how Psionics (Sp) and a regular spell-like ability works. The Monster Manual defines the Psionics (Sp) ability as being a spell-like ability that a creature produces with the power of its mind. It is marked as a spell-like ability and defined as being a spell-like ability, so it functions just like any other spell-like ability.
The only noteworthy difference in the Monster Manual's definitions of the two is that a normal spell-like ability usually has a limit on how often it can be used while psionic abilities are usually usable at will. Clearly, though, these aren't hard rules and there are plenty of exceptions on both sides, with playable psionic races having limited use of psionics and at will SLAs actually being fairly common.

With the inclusion of Expanded Psionics Handbook, creatures with spell-like abilities that are identified as "Psionics (Sp)" are considered to have psi-like abilities, and manifest those abilities as though they were psi-like abilities (which function just like a spell-like ability, but with psionic-equivalent keywords that mean basically the same thing). As mentioned previously, being considered to have psi-like abilities grants the [Psionic] subtype and allow the creature to take psionic feats.
Expanded Psionics Handbook also contains "psionic" versions of all such core monsters. I haven't looked too closely at them, but it looks like they've just have their Psionics (Sp) abilities replaced with equivalent psi-like abilities and swaps spell resistance for power resistance and at surface level what I've seen looks to be a functionally identical reskin for the sake of adopting proper psionics terminology. If EPH is in play and there are no significant differences that I'm overlooking, you might as well just convert all of your core psionic creatures to their EPH versions to simplify interactions with psionic rules.

[Shinoskay]

Q 23

Can you combine augment crystals just like you could any other magic items?

[Yora]

Q24: When you demoralize an oponent with Intimidate, the target becomes shaken for one round. When does the effect end?
At the end of the target's next turn?
At the start of your next turn?
At the end of your next turn?
At the start of the target's turn in the next round?

[Duke of Urrel]

Q 23

Can you combine augment crystals just like you could any other magic items?

A 23

Yes, you can.

The SRD says so.

Adding New Abilities
A creator can add new magical abilities to a magic item with no restrictions. The cost to do this is the same as if the item was not magical. Thus, a +1 longsword can be made into a +2 vorpal longsword, with the cost to create it being equal to that of a +2 vorpal sword minus the cost of a +1 sword.

If the item is one that occupies a specific place on a character’s body, the cost of adding any additional ability to that item increases by 50%. For example, if a character adds the power to confer invisibility to her ring of protection +2, the cost of adding this ability is the same as for creating a ring of invisibility multiplied by 1.5.

An augment crystal is not a magic item with no restrictions. It is restricted, because you can attach only one augment crystal to one and the same item at the same time. This means that every special ability that you add to an augment crystal must multiply its price (in both money and XP) by 1.5.

[Khedrac]

A24: At the start of your next turn.

[Oxylepy]

Q 25 Can you take a feat whose benefit applies it to another feat and postpone applying the feat until a higher level? EG As a first level wizard could I take Magical Artisan and wait until I have Craft Staff to apply it to that feat, or would I be forced to apply it to an item creation feat I have at level 1?

[Yora]

A25: To learn a feat on level advancement, you have to meet all the prerequisites. For a feat to affect another feat, you muat have this other feat. This implicity makes the other feat a prerequisite of the first feat. (Even though it might not be listed as a prerequisite.)

For example, the monster feat "Ability Focus" does list the prerequisite "special ability". You can't take that feat that applies to a specific special ability if you do not have that special ability yet. (You might gain it later through an acquired template.)
Feats should be treated the same way.

Another argument would be that a feat says "Pick one item creation feat" as part of applying the feat. You don't actually have the feat until you have made the selection. There are no rules to force a player to actually learn a feat at a later point after stating the intention to so. The character might even never meet the prerequisites to do so.
The game does not have any provisions for leaving the choices of level advancement until later.

[Morphic tide]

Q 26: Barely-qualified Lich casts XP costs to go down two levels. Casts Haunt Shift on their now 9 HD self, aiming for something that isn't their Phylactery. When destroyed under Impermanent Home or an Exorcism, do they reform phyiscally by their Phylactery, or diffusely by the haunted location?

[Oxylepy]

A26 "You cannot spend so much XP that you lose a level, so you cannot cast the spell unless you have enough XP to spare."

Additionally, the rules for Impermanent Home say "Unless it is a ghost, lich, or some other sort of undead that is resistant to destruction, the haunting presence is also permanently eradicated" suggesting that it would use the special case (Lich's Phylactery) to resist destruction.

[ciopo]

Q27
Can a bard make use of the "cast without verbal components" of a ring of silent spells?
Or other general (effects) that allows a caster to bypass the verbal component of a spell, if we are to enlarge the question

[Oxylepy]

A27 Silent Spell explicitly states that bard spells cannot be enchanced with the feat, while the ring allows you to cast as though using the Silent Spell feat. To get around this by RAW you'd need a means of removing verbal components without interacting with/referencing the feat Silent Spell. Eg Dark Scholar's Book of the Stilled Tongue.

[Shinoskay]

Q 28

Can Energy Transformation Field cast miracle? and assuming yes, how are the details and choices of the spell determined?

I know it says DURATION and caster level effects are determined as if you cast it... but what about things like "casting miracle to create heriocs spell" could the person who triggered the miracle choose the spell heriocs? could they then choose the feat heriocs gives?

[Troacctid]

Q 28

Can Energy Transformation Field cast miracle? and assuming yes, how are the details and choices of the spell determined?

I know it says DURATION and caster level effects are determined as if you cast it... but what about things like "casting miracle to create heriocs spell" could the person who triggered the miracle choose the spell heriocs? could they then choose the feat heriocs gives?

Normally, the deity makes all choices for miracle spells. All the caster gets to do is ask nicely for a particular effect; it's up to the deity to decide how to respond, or whether to respond at all.

It's unclear in RAW whether a spell with a "See text" XP cost is eligible for energy transformation field. Assuming the DM rules that it is eligible, then a miracle generated by the field would have no request associated with it. It would be the equivalent of sending the deity an email with a blank subject line and no body text. The deity could then choose to intervene in whatever manner they feel is appropriate, within the limitations of the spell. You'd have even less control over the outcome than usual. And since the field is the one casting the spell, not you, there's no guarantee that the blank request will even be sent to the deity you intended.

[Shinoskay]

Normally, the deity makes all choices for miracle spells. All the caster gets to do is ask nicely for a particular effect; it's up to the deity to decide how to respond, or whether to respond at all.

It's unclear in RAW whether a spell with a "See text" XP cost is eligible for energy transformation field. Assuming the DM rules that it is eligible, then a miracle generated by the field would have no request associated with it. It would be the equivalent of sending the deity an email with a blank subject line and no body text. The deity could then choose to intervene in whatever manner they feel is appropriate, within the limitations of the spell. You'd have even less control over the outcome than usual. And since the field is the one casting the spell, not you, there's no guarantee that the blank request will even be sent to the deity you intended.

that certainly helps
Q 28 .5
So, what happens when a shadowcraft mage uses shadow stuffs to cast miracle/wish? Is it still up to the diety?

[Oxylepy]

that certainly helps
Q 28 .5
So, what happens when a shadowcraft mage uses shadow stuffs to cast miracle/wish? Is it still up to the diety?

A28.5 It's still going to mimic those spells and the limits are part of the spell description for each. Notably Miracle is up to the deity, and Wish is open to perversion.

[St Fan]

Q 29

Allied Defense

You are good at protecting nearby allies.

Prerequisite:
Combat Expertise

Benefit:
Whenever you use combat expertise to gain a bonus to Armor Class, any adjacent ally gains the same bonus.

Normal:
Combat expertise normally only grants the bonus to you.

A) If a character has some increase to the dodge bonus granted by Combat Expertise (such as the Cautious trait, the Invisible Eye martial art bonus ability, or fighting with a broadblade shortsword...), does this increase also count for the adjacent allies protected by Allied Defense?

B) Combat Expertise gives dodge bonuses, dodge bonuses stack, so if two characters adjacent to each other are both using Allied Defense, their respective Combat Expertise bonuses are added to each other, correct?

[Chronos]

A 29A:

That would depend on the precise wording of the feature that improved Combat Expertise. If it says "When you use Combat Expertise, the dodge bonus granted by that feat is increased by 1", then that would be shared. If it says "When you use Combat Expertise, this feature grants an additional +1 dodge bonus to armor class", then that would be a separate bonus from the one granted by Combat Expertise, and would not be shared.

A 29B:
Yes, as dodge bonuses, they would stack. A group of characters who all have these feats could get quite an impressive armor class this way.

[Khedrac]

A 29B Partial Dispute:

A 29B:
Yes, as dodge bonuses, they would stack. A group of characters who all have these feats could get quite an impressive armor class this way.

Bonuses from the same source do not stack, and since the bonuses are all coming from the feat Combat Expertise (via the feat Allied Defense) I would claim that they have the same source and only the largest applies.

The specifics of what exactly counts as the "source" are not well defined so this becomes DM's call - expect table variation, and in this case I would expect it to get modified in play after the DM sees how well (or not) their ruling is working.
Consider a double line of combatants - except the the solders at the ends, each front-line fighter is having their AC boosted by three allies behind them as well as (potentially) the front line boosts. If they are all first level warriors they can either get getting +3 AC for no penalty to hit or +6 AC for -1 to hit!

[Silly Name]

Q 30

Is there any rule/consensus on how immunity to critical damage/precision damage interacts with rider effects on critical hits?

For example, let's sya I have the Quell the Profane feat from Book of Exalted Deeds, which says:

Whenever you deal a critical hit to an evil creature using a melee weapon with which you are proficient, your opponent must succeed on a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level-your Cha modifier) or take 1d4+1 points of temporary Strength damage.

(emphasis mine). I am fighting an evil undead, such as a vampire, and I roll a Nat 20 when attacking him with my longsword. Normally, I would "just" auto-hit because the vampire is immune to critical hit, and so wouldn't bother to confirm the threat. But since I have this feat, do I roll for confirmation to see if the vampire has to save against my Quell the Profane power, or does he get to ignore it because he's immune to critical hits, and this immunity extends to rider effects?

[Khedrac]

A 30 in general with rider effects, such as a weapon with the burst special ability you would roll to see if the hit would be a critical to determine if the rider kicks in even if the target is immune to critical hits.

In your specific example the effect fails twice - undead are immune to any effect requiring fortitude save unless if also affects objects, and undead are immune to ability damage.

[St Fan]

Q 31

How do you resolve a class feature that contradicts itself in the same paragraph?

Spiritual Connection
You learn to speak with the spirits of the wild places. Although this ability does not automatically make such spirits well disposed toward you, it does provide several benefits.

Level: 1st.

Replaces: This benefit replaces the wild empathy class feature.

Benefit: You can use speak with animals and speak with plants, as the spells (caster level equals your ranger level). You can use any combination of these effects up to three times per day. These are spell-like abilities with caster level equal to your character level.

I underlined the relevant part for emphasis. Does this ability depend on your ranger level, or your character level?

[Silly Name]

A 31

No hard and fast rule, other than "check if erratas for that book exist and fix the contradiction". For your specific example, your table will have to choose whether to key the CL for those SLAs off character level or ranger level.

[Yora]

A31: You look up if there is an errata. Which there is.

Page 50 – Spiritual Connection - Benefit [Addition]
Add “These are spell-like abilities with caster level equal to your character level.”

This is the officially released correction of the error made in the printed book.

[Bobur]

Q32:
In the cover rules it says: For reach weapons use the ranged attack rules to determine cover.

Does that mean that an attack with a reach weapon also suffers from the "attacking into melee" -4 penalty?
I think technically not, but if an ally stands in the way he can still create a soft cover for basically the same result?

[Duke of Urrel]

Q32:
In the cover rules it says: For reach weapons use the ranged attack rules to determine cover.

Does that mean that an attack with a reach weapon also suffers from the "attacking into melee" -4 penalty?
I think technically not, but if an ally stands in the way he can still create a soft cover for basically the same result?

A 32

One thing we know for sure: You cannot overshoot with a reach weapon.

So if you attack into a mêlée with a reach weapon and the only ally engaged in mêlée with your target is farther away from you than your target, you cannot possibly hit your ally instead of your target. No matter how clumsy you are, you cannot overshoot with a reach weapon.

You can overshoot with an actual ranged or thrown weapon. This is made clear by the illustration on page 158 of the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK entitled "Missing with a Thrown Weapon." This illustration shows that a thrown weapon that misses its target may be off target in any one of eight different directions. So the -4 penalty for shooting or throwing into a mêlée (page 140 of the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK) should apply whenever an ally of yours is engaged with your target from any one of eight different directions. Your ally may be in front of, next to, or even behind your target; in any case, your target is engaged in mêlée with an ally, so that your ranged attack must add the -4 penalty.

In contrast, when you miss your target with a reach weapon, you cannot mistakenly hit an ally who is farther away than your target. You can only hit an ally who is closer to you than your target or in some cases next to your target (from your perspective).

Cover is explained on pages 150 and 151 of the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK. Your target has soft cover (page 151) only if an ally impedes your attack just as an object would, following the rules for obstacles. But an object cannot possibly provide cover if it stands behind or merely next to your target.

This proves that the -4 penalty for shooting or throwing into a mêlée applies in a broader set of cases than the -4 Armor Class bonus for soft cover.

This much is clear. But it raises a question that I have never considered before. We may even want to discuss it in another thread, but I feel that I might as well ask it here first.


Q 33

If a target both has soft cover and is engaged in mêlée, then does your target enjoy both the +4 Armor Class bonus and the -4 penalty that you must add to your attack with either a ranged weapon or a reach weapon?

I think the answer is yes, but I what do the rest of you think?

[glass]

Q32:
In the cover rules it says: For reach weapons use the ranged attack rules to determine cover.

Does that mean that an attack with a reach weapon also suffers from the "attacking into melee" -4 penalty?
I think technically not, but if an ally stands in the way he can still create a soft cover for basically the same result?

A32 Cover is a completely separate thing from the penalty for ranged attacks into melee, and would not be invoked by that rule.

An ally providing cover is not "the same result," because cover is a bonus to AC not a penalty to hit, and because for an actual ranged attack both would apply.

ETA:

Q 33

If a target both has soft cover and is engaged in mêlée, then does your target enjoy both the +4 Armor Class bonus and the -4 penalty that you must add to your attack with either a ranged weapon or a reach weapon?

A33 With a ranged attack, yes. With a reach weapon, no (just the cover).

[loky1109]

You can overshoot with an actual ranged or thrown weapon. This is made clear by the illustration on page 158 of the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK entitled "Missing with a Thrown Weapon." This illustration shows that a thrown weapon that misses its target may be off target in any one of eight different directions. So the -4 penalty for shooting or throwing into a mêlée (page 140 of the PLAYER'S HANDBOOK) should apply whenever an ally of yours is engaged with your target from any one of eight different directions. Your ally may be in front of, next to, or even behind your target; in any case, your target is engaged in mêlée with an ally, so that your ranged attack must add the -4 penalty.

A32, objection
You are wrong. First of all, while it isn't clear from illustration itself, but this is illustration of missing with splash weapons only.
Secondly, even if this illustration is applicable to actual ranged or thrown weapon, actual ranged or thrown weapon doesn't make a damage when it lands in the square or grid intersection.
So no, if your target has total cover with invisible hippo between you and him, and you aim into him with a bow you just miss and have zero chances to hit a hippo.

[St Fan]

Q 34

A character, upon reaching... let's say level 6, picks the Item Familiar feat with the general feat gained at 6th level.

She invest life energy and gains a 10% bonus to her XP.

Unfortunately, the item familiar is stolen from her and she cannot recover it before 6 days has gone by.
Thus, she loses not only the XP bonus, but also 1200 of her existing XP (200 XP/level).
This is enough to reduce her level to 5 (yes, item familiar loss can explicitly lower your level, unlike XP paid to cast a spell or craft an item).
With this reduced level, she also lose the level 6 feat, and thus lose Item Familiar as a feat, further breaking the link.

A) Since she does not have the Item Familiar feat at this step, even recovering the original item will not grant her back the lost XP, right?

B) If she regains level 6 the hard way, by leveling up with enough XP, and takes again the Item Familiar feat, she'll have anew the 10% bonus of invest life energy, but even if the item is the same, she never regains the 1200 XP, since the link to the item had to be recreated from the ground up...