RPG Addicts | We Know You're Hooked

Yeah, same here with Shanna's. Are we still going to seek out a dragon-abuser?

While waiting for some ic plans from you all gals and guys, I'll leave for a week. See you next Sunday (16th).

Tapatalkkal küldve az én ALE-L21 eszközömről

I have been looking though all the information on herbs and have found some I would be interested in finding.  However, I've been awake all night and I'm so tired I'm going cross-eyed.  So I will try to post my choices tomorrow.

Is there a limit on what we can have.  I've wrote down quite a few herbs.

Quoting my orig post on what you may have. Will post ic in 24h

(06-19-2017, 07:51 AM)DM Surranó Wrote: [ -> ]Having a look at the whole book I think they exaggerated it a little. Created three prestige classes for alchemy, distinguishing DC depending on which skills you have (and not only which skills to use)...
But considering that the idea itself of using herbs in this setting is worth the acknowledgement and reward. Therefore, I allow access to all the herbs listed in Chapter 5 (Herbal Catalog) with the following conditions:

1. Cranberry has
- 100% chance of having 4d4 doses of any common herb,
- 100% chance of having 3d4 doses of any uncommon herb,
- 50% chance of having 2d4 doses of any rare herb and
- 20% chance of having 1d4 doses of any extremely rare herb.
These chances are for herbs that are both:
- temperate or warm AND
- plains, forests, marshlands, hills, or related to freshwater (coast, bank, water itself, etc).
Halve the chances for anything else (e.g. mountain forests, cold plains, temperate mountains, underground) but the amount remains the same.

2. The party may nominate the herb, roll the chance (for rare and up), then roll the amount. No retries, i.e. the whole party may roll only once for any given herb.
Whatever Cranberry doesn't have cannot be found in Crystal Grove or anywhere near.

3. Plants that cost less than 1gp a dose are free of charge for the first half of stock.
Anything else (second half of stock and 1+ gp per dose) need to be paid for.

4. Once you nominated the herb I will review it to make sure I know what you have. I'll try my best not to veto anything

Tapatalkkal küldve az én ALE-L21 eszközömről

Divination spells are not affected by spell resistance. I looked it up to be certain.

Interesting, the spell description explicitly states that there is SR against the 4th level druid spell Scrying. Reference please?

EDIT: I guess you refer to this passage of the description of SR:

Special Abilities Wrote:When Spell Resistance Applies

Each spell includes an entry that indicates whether spell resistance applies to the spell. In general, whether spell resistance applies depends on what the spell does:

(...)

Divination

These spells do not affect creatures directly and are not subject to spell resistance, even though what they reveal about a creature might be very damaging.

There are two generic errata rules, kind of disclaimers, that I can refer here.

1. Specific supercedes generic.
Usually, I would argue that the specific spell supersedes general statements on game mechanics, and this is supported by the explicit phrase "in general" here.
There is also the thing that if it would be black-and-white then divination spells wouldn't even have a "Spell Resistance:" entry in their headers but they do (as opposed to "range: personal" spells that don't have saves or SR) and indeed most have "No" but Scrying and Greater Scrying are exceptions, and this is not even changed in Pathfinder. Someone versed in DND4 or DND5 could comment on those versions of scrying.

2. Text supercedes table.
However, others could argue that text supercedes table and spell header is something like a table (well it is not but let's consider it this way) but even then, can you compare the table of a specific spell to a completely different section of the rules?

But since I'm seriously concerned about this (why is Scrying an exception? why are there discussions about making scry-proof rooms if SR, or Spell Immunity, for that matter, applies?) I choose the middle way: knowing this information (maybe Toot also did not account for possible SR) I give Toot two choices:
A) go for it and roll SR again (I did the first roll with a physical die because of my limited access so it's "official" only because I'm the DM so let's pretend I didn't roll). You use one of the three scales.
B) forget Scrying (for now) and pray for a different 4th level spell for today. You can keep all three scales for future use.
Note that this decision must be made without knowing the result of Koriolis' will save.

I do not believe the scale is destroyed when the spell is cast.  The scale is not a material component.  It just establishes a connection to the dragon.  The only material components to the spell are for Arcane Casters.

Quote:Arcane Material Component

The eye of a hawk, an eagle, or a roc, plus nitric acid, copper, and zinc.

There are no Material Components listed for Divine Casters.  They do have a Divine Focus of either Holy water of at least 100gp value (cleric) or a Natural Pool (druid).  It's actually cheapest for a Druid to cast the spell.

True, my assumption on this was wrong. The scales are not lost if used for Scrying.

I find that really odd but not surprising. DnD has a lot of ifs, ands, or buts. I can't imagine why one divination type would be different from another. It does fall under the rule of not affecting the target. Curiosity compels me to attempt to research this further.

(07-19-2017, 04:10 PM)DM Surranó Wrote: [ -> ]1. Specific supercedes generic.
Usually, I would argue that the specific spell supersedes general statements on game mechanics, and this is supported by the explicit phrase "in general" here.
There is also the thing that if it would be black-and-white then divination spells wouldn't even have a "Spell Resistance:" entry in their headers but they do (as opposed to "range: personal" spells that don't have saves or SR) and indeed most have "No" but Scrying and Greater Scrying are exceptions, and this is not even changed in Pathfinder. Someone versed in DND4 or DND5 could comment on those versions of scrying.

2. Text supercedes table.
However, others could argue that text supercedes table and spell header is something like a table (well it is not but let's consider it this way) but even then, can you compare the table of a specific spell to a completely different section of the rules?

But since I'm seriously concerned about this (why is Scrying an exception? why are there discussions about making scry-proof rooms if SR, or Spell Immunity, for that matter, applies?) I choose the middle way: knowing this information (maybe Toot also did not account for possible SR) I give Toot two choices:
A) go for it and roll SR again (I did the first roll with a physical die because of my limited access so it's "official" only because I'm the DM so let's pretend I didn't roll). You use one of the three scales.
B) forget Scrying (for now) and pray for a different 4th level spell for today. You can keep all three scales for future use.
Note that this decision must be made without knowing the result of Koriolis' will save.

My points

0. There is no SR in DND5, but some monsters have a similiar option: Legendary Resistance (3/Day). If the dragon fails a saving throw, it can choose to succeed instead.

1. The divination VS SR is just an advice:
When in doubt about whether a spell's effect is direct or indirect, consider the spell's school:

2. Spell Resistance

The final entry in the spell header tells you if the spell must overcome spell resistance (if any) to affect the recipient. If the entry is "no" then the spell most likely does not affect the recipient directly, but instead either affects an area or produces an effect which then produces the spell's result. Most spells that work only on willing creatures also have a spell resistance entry of "no" because it is assumed that a willing creature lowers its spell resistance before receiving the spell.

If the spell entry is "yes," the spell usually goes to work directly on the recipient's mind or body and the caster must make a level check to overcome spell resistance before the spell can affect the creature.

3.Descriptive text usually doesn't consider the effects of saving throws, spell resistance, or creature immunities: As noted in Part Six, most spell descriptions are written with the assumption that the recipient's saving throw against the spell (if one is allowed) fails. Likewise, the spell description doesn't bother to remind you that the spell won't work on recipients that are immune to it. For example, the fireball description doesn't tell you that the spell won't damage things that are immune to fire. You're expected to figure that out for yourself when you note the spell's fire descriptor.