Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Maelphaxerazz

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
1
Min/Max 3.x / Re: Sanctify Water - Actually an attack
« on: April 24, 2023, 11:25:35 AM »
Interesting thing about D&D holy water: if you consider it carefully, doesn't quite add up.

Bless Water says that it imbues a one-pint flask of water to create a holy water flask. A holy water flask weighs 1lb in the equipment list. But a US liquid pint of water weighs 472 g at 62 °F, which is slightly more than a pound, and that is not factoring in the weight of a flask. Since the flask breaks on impact, it is probably glass. Glass is pretty dense, its weight is not negligible. A one-pint glass bottle weighs over half a pound: a one-pint glass flask of water, logically speaking, should weigh one-and-a-half pounds minimum, but a holy water flask weighs one pound flat. It isn't a matter of the PHB not bothering with tracking weights that small, either: a one-ounce vial is listed as weighing ⅒lb. So the actual volume of water blessed by Bless Water must be somewhat less than a pint to allow the full flask to weigh a pound rather than a pound and a half. If I were to venture a guess, a "holy pint" is ten fluid ounces, making it slightly smaller than a bottle of Coke.

The price of the bottle used is also in question. Glass is not cheap. A one-ounce vial costs 1gp, and a flask of holy water is more than an ounce of liquid, so no doubt the bottle used for holy water is worth more. But it is never factored into the price: Bless Water's material component of five pounds of silver costs 25gp, and Good-aligned temples sell the holy water "at cost" for... 25gp. The authors never listed the price of the flask, they clearly didn't intend for players to think about it, despite glass clearly being valuable in this world. The reasonable conclusion is that Bless Water consumes somewhat less than five pounds of silver, and some of that silver is simply assumed to be spent already on a bottle.

 Which brings us to this feat. Holy Water in the PhB is clearly not meant to be thought of in terms of a specific volume of liquid, and the temporary holy water created by this feat even less so. The cleric releases a burst of positive energy, which then channels through nearby water. This deals 2d4 damage right away, and another 2d4 damage for 1+ChaMod rounds. It does not deal more than 2d4 damage if there is a lot of water around the target: if that is what the feat were intended to do, then there would be at least some way of calculating how much damage that would be. We don't even know the real volume of a "holy pint" of water, as it clearly isn't a regular pint of water. But it also still deals damage in subsequent rounds in a way that regular holy water wouldn't.

Since it doesn't specify the amount of water necessary to do the damage, I would just treat it as 2d4 damage initial, plus another 2d4 damage per round for the duration. At the DM's discretion, the subject might avoid the damage if it is really dry.

2
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: weird kalamar spell
« on: February 03, 2023, 06:48:39 PM »
@Maelph

1/3 of the Kalamar books are unlicensed, including the Player's Guide 3.5. but the 3.0 version is licensed.


I see, the book I'm looking at is actually 3.0. my bad.

3
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: weird kalamar spell
« on: February 03, 2023, 10:40:16 AM »
Well, if that's the reason you removed them, then I think you should put them back. Just opened up the Kingdoms of Kalamar Player's Guide, and there it is: Wizards of the Coast Official Licensed Product seal. Page 1, under the Table of Contents. Clear as day.

4
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: extremely hypothetical OGL 1.1
« on: January 16, 2023, 07:19:36 AM »
"2pp" only exists by tradition. Properly speaking, the first party is WotC, the second party is the customer buying the game, and everybody else are third parties. A "2nd party publication" would be a letter you write to WotC complaining about their lunatic practices.

We call Kalamar and etc. 2pp because they feel semi-official, so the gaming community calls them 2pp as something between 3pp and 1pp even though it makes no gramatical sense to do so.

People elevating WotC publications above officially liscensed publications above everyone else's publications is not any sort of official rule, just tradition. We made that tradition to create a shorthand for what is allowed in a particular game. i.e. so we can say "all WotC and all 2pp material allowed, and only these two 3pp books that I like allowed, stop asking". Since the reasoning for elevating WotC above other publishers is that WotC is thought to have better quality material, that reasoning would still apply, so all pp will remain the same pp as before.

5
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: extremely hypothetical OGL 1.1
« on: January 12, 2023, 06:34:15 AM »
It would still be a work published by a third party, and thus 3pp. The concept of intellectual property ownership and the concept of third party publishers are separate concepts.

Compare, for example, the Dragonlance books for 3rd edition by Sovereign Press. Hasbro (through Wizards of the Coast) own the Dragonlance IP, but licensed it to a third party (Sovereign Press), which published books using that IP. They don't suddenly merge with Hasbro just because they publish books using IP Hasbro owns.

6
Min/Max 3.x / Re: Fun Pathfinds
« on: July 14, 2022, 12:00:52 PM »
they would feel the oppressive heat, but take no damage?

Only for a fraction of a second. The lack of pain from the lack of damage would be incontrovertible proof that the illusion is false, and thus the target would automatically Disbelieve the illusion.

Quote from: Da Rules
Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding foes, but useless for attacking them directly.

{ . . . }

Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.

A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.

A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.

7
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Chaotic without being Chaotic?
« on: June 20, 2022, 03:41:03 AM »
Yes, it would. An "effect" is not specifically defined in rules (IIRC), but traditionally includes basically everything (which is why the feat calls out feat prereqs as an example). A Lawful Good character with Ordered Chaos is effectively Lawful Chaotic Good.

This is similar to having an alignment subtype. For example, a baatezu who reforms and becomes Neutral Good is now Lawful Neutral Good Evil. If he has the Ordered Chaos feat as well, he is Lawful Chaotic Neutral Good Evil. If he completes the Ritual of Alignment and gains the Good subtype (see Savage Species page 148) and later strays from the path of Good to become True Neutral, he is now Lawful Chaotic True Neutral Good Evil, thus being every alignment simultaneously. Like a five-colour Magic: the Gathering card.

8
General D&D Discussion / Re: What are the real party roles of D&D?
« on: March 11, 2022, 12:17:48 PM »
  • Damage. The most fundamental role, as all D&D games have something that needs killing.
  • Protection. This character protects other characters from damage, either by being in the way and using AoO tricks or by magical means or by creating obstacles for the enemy. Basically, Prevent Damage.
  • Healing. All D&D games have things that will hurt PCs, so somebody has to patch them up afterwards. In practice this is a minor role, a side-gig for characters who also do something else.
  • Control. This means Solving Combat Problems: there is some obstacle that prevents the PCs from properly damaging the enemy, and this character overcomes these obstacles. This is almost always a spellcaster in D&D.
  • "Rogue." I put this in quotes because it is an actual class name, but I cannot think of a good general name at the moment. This character overcomes environmental obstacles: locked doors, traps, blockages, stealthy entry, disguises, and so on. The party needs to get to the place where they do damage, and this character gets them there. While a thief-type character is traditional for this, it could also be done with spells.
  • Face. This character solves social problems. Since social problems aren't a constant issue in D&D, the party face always fulfils some other role as well.
  • Buff/Debuff. While not strictly necessary for the game to function, helping other characters do things has long been a standard part of the game.

9
I haven't the foggiest idea, but I'll respond so you know your question isn't echoing silently in the void, unheard and unwanted.

Which Living Greyhawk material is the ban listed in?

10
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: [3.5] Favored Soul
« on: December 16, 2021, 11:07:04 PM »
Presumably there either aren't any favoured souls of the Dreaming Dark, or a favoured soul of the Dreaming Dark would need homebrewed alternative class features to make sense (so that they can have a mind blade). A mind-blade-wieling divine character would be cool, but is not provided by existing rules.

11
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: [3.5] Favored Soul
« on: December 16, 2021, 05:07:47 PM »
Dragonlance classes are mostly crap, the only one worth trying is the Nightstalker which gets Ghost cohorts. All the rest (Mystic, Mariner, Noble,  Master, etc) do their things worse than classes from other books. Dragonlance didn't get much TLC in 3.x, it is what it is.

12
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: [3.5] Favored Soul
« on: December 14, 2021, 11:36:44 PM »
You are welcome.

Considering you were looking at the Mystic and the Favoured Soul, it seems that you are interested in a spontaneous spellcasting class that uses the Cleric spell list. Have you considered the Spontaneous Divine Caster variant for the Cleric?

13
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: [3.5] Favored Soul
« on: December 14, 2021, 12:15:55 PM »
Usually, your deity doesn't matter for much. There are some feats with patron prerequisites, though: you can try combining them for fun and profit.

Most of those are initiate feats, many of which have Cleric as a prerequisite, but worry not: according to the rules, Favoured Soul counts towards that.

Dragon Magic on Initiate Feats says

    Any character of a class that must select a deity and that uses the cleric spell list for spellcasting can treat his level in that class as if it were a cleric level for the purpose of qualifying for an initiate feat. For example, a favored soul (see Complete Divine) who had chosen Bahamut as his deity and who had reached 3rd level could select the Initiate of Bahamut feat. (15)

14
Min/Max 3.x / Re: Fun Pathfinds
« on: January 22, 2021, 02:03:58 AM »
Is Pathfinder like 3.5, where a (divine) focus is not used up?  IOW, after you cast the spell, do you still have your 5000gp worth of oils?
Yeah, its basically just a focus
Actually, no. A Divine Focus component is more specific than a focus.
Quote from: Pathfinder Core Rulebook page 213
Divine  Focus  (DF):  A  divine  focus  component  is  an  item  of  spiritual  significance.  The  divine  focus  for  a  cleric  or  a  paladin  is  a  holy  symbol  appropriate  to  the  character’s faith. The divine focus for a druid or a ranger is a sprig of holly, or some other sacred plant.
A Divine Focus is always a holy symbol or a sacred plant; when a divine spell requires a different kind of object, it is an F component, not a DF component. (For example, Imbue Army Special Ability is a divine spell, and it has F (a silver mirror worth 100 gp) as a component.)
As such, I don't think the argument holds that the 5000gp of oil pertains to the DF in the Components line, even though it is placed beside it. The brackets can only refer to the M component in this spell, RAW and RAI.

15
I'm heartened to see that this thread's still continuing in the near-eight years since I first posted it.
Is it truly heartening, when that means that Paizo has been publishing absolute trash for years?  :bigeyes

16
Drinking a water elemental seems... morally questionable, at least. Probably pretty dangerous, too.

17
Handbooks / Re: Shadowcraft Mage Handbook
« on: October 04, 2019, 10:37:46 PM »
I certainly can if others think it worthy.
Yes, please do.

18
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Uses for Minor Creation?
« on: June 17, 2019, 08:54:37 AM »
It says you cannot use it as a material component, but a focus is a different thing. Maybe there are expensive vegetable focuses somewhere?

19
There is at least a couple of cases where it might be useful: Phantasmal Killer and Weird are Fear effects, and being dazed is better than dying instantly.

Still an awful feat, of course.

20
D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder / Re: Appraise , what-can-you-do-with
« on: June 28, 2018, 09:09:55 PM »
Lords of Madness: the Book of Aberrations has slaves. The basic method for determining the value of a slave is based on the creature’s CR, using the following formula: Cost = (CR, minimum 1)2 × 100 gp

Therefore, you can use Appraise to find a creature's CR, by appraising their value if sold into slavery. Useful for predicting how hard a fight would be.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8