Artoomis
First Post
Another thread got me really thinking about this.
It seems to me there is an oversight in the “conditions” rules regarding opposed checks for grappling, disarming, etc. and for reactionary skill checks like listen and spot. A number of conditions prevent any “actions,” but make no mention of what happens when forced to make an opposed check or skill check. Here is my take on what those conditions are, and what the penalty to those checks should be: It’s fairly obvious from looking at other conditions that some penalty should be imposed if these checks are allowed at all (“lesser” conditions impose attack penalties, but these conditions did not as an “attack” is normally an “action.”). There is also a good argument that the checks should be allowed, as not allowing them could be a bit overpowered.
Dazed: The creature is unable to act normally. A dazed creature can take no actions, but has no penalty to AC.
A dazed condition typically lasts 1 round. With no penalty to AC, it seems a Dazed character can react normally, so no penalties here.
Entangled: …An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a Concentration check (DC 15 + the spell’s level) or lose the spell. Another place where I see no clear case for a penalty, so none here.
Helpless: …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)… Fascinating. No mention of opposed checks from grappling, disarming, etc. Obviously they would no be allowed, but a rules lawyer might actually insist they are allowed because of the lack of prohibition.
Nauseated: Experiencing stomach distress. Nauseated creatures are unable to attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything else requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a single move action per turn. A difficult one. One would think they would not do well in resisting grapples, disarm attempts, concentrating on listening or spotting, etc., but there is no mention of a penalty. Since they can manage a move action and get no penalty to AC, they should certainly be allowed to make these checks, but at a –2 circumstance penalty. This condition is more sever than Sickened or Shaken, so the penalties should be the same.
Pinned: Held immobile (but not helpless) in a grapple. Another interesting case. No mention of not getting to resist attempts to Disarm or Sunder, but how would they if “immobile.” No such opposed checks are possible.
Shaken: A shaken character takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. I specifically left this in for comparison with conditions that take away actions.
Sickened: The character takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls, weapon damage rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. I specifically left this in for comparison with conditions that take away actions.
Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). With no guidance here, it does seem obvious that they would do very poorly indeed at resisting grapples, disarm attempts, concentrating on listening or spotting, etc., but there is no mention of a penalty. Since they can manage a move action and get no penalty to AC, they should certainly be allowed to make these checks, but at a –2 circumstance penalty. This condition is more sever than Sickened or Shaken, so the penalties should be at least the same.
I think I'll submit errata after I get your feedback. It looks like only Stunned and Nauseated conditions need errata for this.
It seems to me there is an oversight in the “conditions” rules regarding opposed checks for grappling, disarming, etc. and for reactionary skill checks like listen and spot. A number of conditions prevent any “actions,” but make no mention of what happens when forced to make an opposed check or skill check. Here is my take on what those conditions are, and what the penalty to those checks should be: It’s fairly obvious from looking at other conditions that some penalty should be imposed if these checks are allowed at all (“lesser” conditions impose attack penalties, but these conditions did not as an “attack” is normally an “action.”). There is also a good argument that the checks should be allowed, as not allowing them could be a bit overpowered.
Dazed: The creature is unable to act normally. A dazed creature can take no actions, but has no penalty to AC.
A dazed condition typically lasts 1 round. With no penalty to AC, it seems a Dazed character can react normally, so no penalties here.
Entangled: …An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a Concentration check (DC 15 + the spell’s level) or lose the spell. Another place where I see no clear case for a penalty, so none here.
Helpless: …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)… Fascinating. No mention of opposed checks from grappling, disarming, etc. Obviously they would no be allowed, but a rules lawyer might actually insist they are allowed because of the lack of prohibition.
Nauseated: Experiencing stomach distress. Nauseated creatures are unable to attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything else requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a single move action per turn. A difficult one. One would think they would not do well in resisting grapples, disarm attempts, concentrating on listening or spotting, etc., but there is no mention of a penalty. Since they can manage a move action and get no penalty to AC, they should certainly be allowed to make these checks, but at a –2 circumstance penalty. This condition is more sever than Sickened or Shaken, so the penalties should be the same.
Pinned: Held immobile (but not helpless) in a grapple. Another interesting case. No mention of not getting to resist attempts to Disarm or Sunder, but how would they if “immobile.” No such opposed checks are possible.
Shaken: A shaken character takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. I specifically left this in for comparison with conditions that take away actions.
Sickened: The character takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls, weapon damage rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. I specifically left this in for comparison with conditions that take away actions.
Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can’t take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). With no guidance here, it does seem obvious that they would do very poorly indeed at resisting grapples, disarm attempts, concentrating on listening or spotting, etc., but there is no mention of a penalty. Since they can manage a move action and get no penalty to AC, they should certainly be allowed to make these checks, but at a –2 circumstance penalty. This condition is more sever than Sickened or Shaken, so the penalties should be at least the same.
I think I'll submit errata after I get your feedback. It looks like only Stunned and Nauseated conditions need errata for this.
Last edited:
