Pathfinder 1E Dual-Curse oracle

[Starfox]

Dual-Cursed Oracle - Pathfinder_OGC

the Misfortune ability seems to be either very powerful or very easy to misinterpret:

Misfortune (Ex): At 1st level, as an immediate action, you can force a creature within 30 feet to reroll any one d20 roll that it has just made before the results of the roll are revealed. The creature must take the result of the reroll, even if it’s worse than the original roll. Once a creature has suffered from your misfortune, it cannot be the target of this revelation again for 1 day.

As I read this, nothing prevents you from using this on your friends when they make bad die rolls, or even on yourself - you and your friends can be "a creature within 30 feet".

Is this an ok reading?

 

[Ramaster]

Dual-Cursed Oracle - Pathfinder_OGC

the Misfortune ability seems to be either very powerful or very easy to misinterpret:



As I read this, nothing prevents you from using this on your friends when they make bad die rolls, or even on yourself - you and your friends can be "a creature within 30 feet".

Is this an ok reading?

We used it like that, yeah, for a campaign that run up to lvl 10. The ability was, indeed, very powerful. But, since it ate up the immediate action, thus taking the swift action from the next turn, I wasn't auto-used all the time.

It is VERY powerful, but I wouldn't allow the oracle to target herself with it (even if by RAW it might be that way), since there is another revelation, Fortune (if I am not mistaken) from the same archetype that lets her do just that.

 

[Kinak]

It's a pretty good ability as you're reading it (although it takes up a mystery and requires a second curse with no ability). I haven't seen anything to contradict that reading from Paizo. The ability is probably just confusingly named.

If you're a player, I'd doublecheck with your DM about both that question and how they plan to handle dice for NPCs. If opponents' rolls aren't made in the open, the power doesn't really work as intended.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Gfreak2x9]

I see no reason to say no. The rulebook doesn't say you can't, so I say go for it!

 

[Savage Wombat]

My wife plays one - yes, it's powerful, but the range restriction is also a strong limiter. (Our party uses a lot of haste, so they keep running away from her.)

My reading on the Paizo forum suggests that the OP's reading is correct - except for the "on yourself" - it may not be how they wanted it to work originally, but it's the correct interpretation of the RAW and they've shown no interest in revising or errata-ing it.

 

[Gorgoroth]

Nevermind, it's basically just disadvantage mechanic from Next

 

[Kasbark]

It's not really like disadvantage at all. First off, you use it after the original roll is made, and you use the second result regardless of if it's higher or lower than the original. It's also 1/round (due to being an immediate action) and can only affect any given creature 1/day.

 

[Savage Wombat]

I have a suspicion that it was originally intended to work like disadvantage, but that the developers found it created timing issues or something.

 

[Gorgoroth]

It's not really like disadvantage at all. First off, you use it after the original roll is made, and you use the second result regardless of if it's higher or lower than the original. It's also 1/round (due to being an immediate action) and can only affect any given creature 1/day.

Since your decision to use misfortune is independent of the die roll value (since you cannot know it), how exactly is it any different than choosing to force someone to have disadvantage and them rolling twice and chosing the lower value? Whether they drop the die before or after you call it, is immaterial since you don't know the outcome of the first one, and since one die roll cannot affect the next one, ipso facto it IS the mechanic from Next (or rather, perhaps the other way around

Otherwise I will have to burn my elementary stats textbooks.

 

[Savage Wombat]

They'd be identical IF the rule was "roll again and take the lower of the two rolls." Since it's "roll sight unseen, and take the second roll", it's really no different than rolling once. Which is not really the intent.