Rules Quirks

[Solo]

(click to show/hide)

This is a bit convoluted, but...

A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (-5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks gets no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.

  From the Helpless section.

A character with Dexterity 0 is paralyzed.

  From ability damage section.

So, if you are helpless, you are by default treated as paralyzed.

A paralyzed character is frozen in place and unable to move or act. A paralyzed character has effective Dexterity and Strength scores of 0 and is helpless, but can take purely mental actions. A winged creature flying in the air at the time that it becomes paralyzed cannot flap its wings and falls. A paralyzed swimmer can’t swim and may drown. A creature can move through a space occupied by a paralyzed creature—ally or not. Each square occupied by a paralyzed creature, however, counts as 2 squares.

So, you can make only mental actions while you are sleeping.  If you can make a case that making a reflex save is purely mental action, then I guess you get a reflex save while sleeping.

A helpless character is paralyzed, [...] sleeping, [or] unconscious.

A is B, B2, and B3.

A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (-5 modifier).

A is C.

A character with Dexterity 0 is paralyzed.

C is B.

A paralyzed character has effective Dexterity and Strength scores of 0 and is helpless.

B is C and A.

A paralyzed character [...] can take purely mental actions.

C can D.

C is not necessarily A. B2 isn't necessarily A, B, B3, nor C. In the preceding sentence, B2 interchanged with B3, is. Ergo, an opponent being paralyzed is not premise "to deliver a coup de grace". I don't want to mess with this anymore; I don't want to have to read all of this, right now.

Creatures capable of taking purely mental actions (such as manifesting powers) can do so.

If B2 is C, then B2 can D. A sleeping character can manifest powers‽

It's called nocturnal manifestation.

[littha]

It would save you from the dragon though.

that's what i meant

but there's probably some feats that might help against the spells too

A normal tower shield would protect you from the dragon too. We have that weird RAW thing of tower shields protecting themselves because they are your gear and you have total cover. Only reason the dragon doesn't get you is that as a line attack it is blocked by total cover.

[EjoThims]

I didn't think that "A is B" = "A = B", just as "all squares are rectangles" but not vice-versa.

Is there difference between "A is B" and "all As are Bs"? No, "it is traditional to use is rather than are as the copula, hence All A is B rather than All As are Bs."

Ah, I misread how you were using it.

Your third example is still backwards though, as you 0 dex is C, and your third conditional starts with 0 dex.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

  ... I've had restless "leg" syndrome
and nocturnal "manifestations" before.
But I wasn't studying for the GRE while
either was going on ... 

[Endarire]

Martial Study can be taken 3 times.  You can choose boosts, counters, and so on, but if the designers seemingly intended this for, "Three strikes and you're out!"

[Cyclone Joker]

I think I am misreading it, but it seems that Break Enchantment makes Clerics cry. Buh-bye all your buffs from Transmutation and Enchantment. No save, no CL check, just lose.

[dman11235]

There is a CL check, but you appear to be correct.  It's a capped CL check, however, so eventually it will be impossible to break anything.

[littha]

It only hits enchantments, transmutations and curses so any abjuration buffs you have would survive

[Cyclone Joker]

There is a CL check, but you appear to be correct.  It's a capped CL check, however, so eventually it will be impossible to break anything.

Only for Instantaneous enchantments or Transmutations. Any with any other duration don't require a check.

It only hits enchantments, transmutations and curses so any abjuration buffs you have would survive

Yeah, but how many powerful buffs are Abjuration? AMF, Stoneskin, and Energy Immunity?

Overall, I'd qualify it as a ridiculously good unintended effect.

[littha]

Divine power is evocation, which is also not dispelled.

[zook1shoe]

There is a CL check, but you appear to be correct.  It's a capped CL check, however, so eventually it will be impossible to break anything.

Only for Instantaneous enchantments or Transmutations. Any with any other duration don't require a check.

It only hits enchantments, transmutations and curses so any abjuration buffs you have would survive

Yeah, but how many powerful buffs are Abjuration? AMF, Stoneskin, and Energy Immunity?

Overall, I'd qualify it as a ridiculously good unintended effect.

I think that it requires a CL check for any of effects it tries to break, not just the instantaneous ones. The wording is a little poor.

[Cyclone Joker]

Divine Power is Evocation? Crap. Still, every other good Cleric buff is Transmutation, right? Even if it doesn't get all of them, the sheer number of powerful spells it could strip with no save is massive.

There is a CL check, but you appear to be correct.  It's a capped CL check, however, so eventually it will be impossible to break anything.

Only for Instantaneous enchantments or Transmutations. Any with any other duration don't require a check.

It only hits enchantments, transmutations and curses so any abjuration buffs you have would survive

Yeah, but how many powerful buffs are Abjuration? AMF, Stoneskin, and Energy Immunity?

Overall, I'd qualify it as a ridiculously good unintended effect.

I think that it requires a CL check for any of effects it tries to break, not just the instantaneous ones. The wording is a little poor.

That's obviously the intent, but the sentence structure would indicate only against instantaneous effects. Any sane DM would rule with you, but the RAW, I believe, supports me. Ambiguity is ambiguous, though.

[zook1shoe]

But the instantaneous part isn't the only guideline for what the spell looks for. You have to look at both parts of context.

Otherwise, you could argue that the spell dispels ALL enchantments, transmutations, and curses with no check.
And since there's a period, and a break in the way its structured. You get to dispel with a limited CL check any instantaneous effect, no matter the school or type, or even ability type.

Where do you put the line? Obviously, the first line helps put some guidelines to the rest of the paragraph.

[dman11235]

No, you absolutely have to do the CL check for each effect.  The sentence structure is poor, yes, but it is clearly referring to the previous sentence, rather than the one about instantaneous effects.  And yes, it only applies to transmutation and enchantment, and then curses.  It's still really stupid.  In reality, it should only apply to non-Willing spells, in other words, maybe have the target be "willing creatures".

[zook1shoe]

Exactly what I was saying

[Cyclone Joker]

No, you absolutely have to do the CL check for each effect.  The sentence structure is poor, yes, but it is clearly referring to the previous sentence, rather than the one about instantaneous effects.  And yes, it only applies to transmutation and enchantment, and then curses.  It's still really stupid.  In reality, it should only apply to non-Willing spells, in other words, maybe have the target be "willing creatures".

Given that it says "Blah blah blah Instantaneous Effects. For each such effect, blah blah blah." "Each such effect" clearly refers to any instantaneous effect, as they were the only things explicitly referred to as effects, and directly preceded it, and so must be the subject. It only works due to the hideous sentence structure, but that "instantaneous effects" are the only thing that could possibly be referred to by "Any such effect." If the enchantments, transmutations, and curses were referred to as effects, you would be absolutely correct, but they weren't

[zook1shoe]

No, you absolutely have to do the CL check for each effect.  The sentence structure is poor, yes, but it is clearly referring to the previous sentence, rather than the one about instantaneous effects.  And yes, it only applies to transmutation and enchantment, and then curses.  It's still really stupid.  In reality, it should only apply to non-Willing spells, in other words, maybe have the target be "willing creatures".

Given that it says "Blah blah blah Instantaneous Effects. For each such effect, blah blah blah." "Each such effect" clearly refers to any instantaneous effect, as they were the only things explicitly referred to as effects, and directly preceded it, and so must be the subject. It only works due to the hideous sentence structure, but that "instantaneous effects" are the only thing that could possibly be referred to by "Any such effect." If the enchantments, transmutations, and curses were referred to as effects, you would be absolutely correct, but they weren't

Then are you agreeing with most of what I said in post #52?

[dman11235]

That part (the "instantaneous effects" is referring to something, therefor it cannot be directly referred to.  Because it is referring to the sentence before it, anything that modifies it will also modify the sentence before it.  The sentence about the CL checks, regardless of whether it modifies the previous sentence or the first sentence, will modify the first sentence.  I'm no english major, so my terms are messed up, but hopefully you get my point.  And if I were the one writing that spell, you can be certain I would change the wording to be less confusing.  I'd probably have all three of those sentences run together, in fact, separated by commas, so that it's all one thought.  I would absolutely have had the "instantaneous effects ) be in the same sentence as the target, that way, since new sentence=new thought, the CL check would modify the whole previous sentence.

[linklord231]

Regardless of the CL check, there's still the one minute casting time.  If a fully buffed Cleric can't kill you or force an unbeatable Concentration check to make you lose the spell, then it isn't worth stripping the buffs off him anyway. 

[zook1shoe]

What's an unbeatable DC when there are ways to auto-succeed checks, or even make it so your for doesn't know you're casting to be able to force a Concentration check