Last Update: July 15, 2001 (Revision History)
What this is: The following list of Frequently Asked Questions is an attempt to answer the questions and summarize the topics that get posted all the time on the various D&D message boards. It is organized in the same fashion as the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual.
What this is not: This is not intended to contain the answer to every single little question, particularly those whose answers can be found easily in the books. This is not intended to catalog every bit of Sage Advice or errata. I do not plan on adding FAQ entries for rulebooks I do not personally use (the Psionics Handbook comes to mind), but I would be willing to link to other FAQs as appropriate. It is not intended to use up tons of my time; I'd rather spend my time playing :)
If you don't see an answer to your question, please consult the indicies for the various books. They are very thorough, and a bit of leg work will answer most of your questions. For example, if you want to know if you can carry a torch in the same hand that is wielding a large shield, look up shield in the PH index. Better yet, look up the description of the large shield in the Equipment chapter of the Player's Handbook. You've got a brain, so use it!
If you still can't find an answer, do not ask me over email. I don't have the time to answer questions, so such messages will be ignored. There are a number of places to ask arbitrary rules questions that you can't find an answer for:
If you have new item for the FAQ, please mail guyf@apple.com with the question and answer, along with any references (page numbers, responses from the Sage, etc.) to support the answer (if necessary). I don't have the time to edit everyone's entries, so only well written items with a format similar (or identical) to the format below will be added.
And now, on to the show...
All specialist Wizards still count as Wizards. Therefore, all specialist Wizard classes are favored classes for elves.
No. None of the races are automatically proficient in Exotic Weapons.
No. A Barbarian's Rage only ends when the duration runs out, irrespective of whether he is knocked out, stunned, held, incapacitated, slept, or reduced to -1 (or lower) hit points.
Wrong! See the Rogue section of the FAQ for examples of how to Sneak Attack a Barbarian.
Yes, a Bard counts as his own "ally", and therefore benefits from his own use of Inspire Courage (or any other bardic music ability that works on allies).
First, two-weapon fighting isn't necessarily weak; see the Combat section of the FAQ for a discussion on whether fighting with two weapons sucks. Besides, a special ability doesn't have to be constantly relevant to be useful. Rangers don't have to use two-weapon fighting all the time to maximize their effectiveness. In fact, to be most efficient, a Ranger should only use two-weapon fighting at times when it makes sense.
Rangers have two non-obvious special abilities which balance them quite well with Paladins: Skills and Animal Companions.
A Ranger gets 4 skill points per level, and -- more importantly -- they have a great class skill selection. They are only other class besides Rogue with both Spot and Listen as class skills, and they have excellent access to stealth-type skills. They also have the third greatest quantity of class skills (behind Rogues and Bards). Use those skills!
At 4th-level, a Ranger can begin gaining Animal Companions via the Animal Friendship spell. While this gives Rangers an ability similar to a Paladin's warhorse, the Ranger's ability is much more flexible. Rangers can have more than one companion, often with useful special abilities such as flight, scent, climb, etc. Use those animal companions!
Despite these facts, many people feel that Rangers are weak and in need of improvement. If you do some searching online, you can find a number of Ranger variants that you might like better. Just use those and quit your whining!
First, Rangers aren't necessarily forestmen archers like Robin Hood. Any individual Ranger may have a totally different focus. The Ranger class makes a great scout, bounty hunter, assassin, woodsman, and lots of other character concepts.
Second, Rangers have their ability to fight with two weapons because previous editions of D&D gave Rangers the same sort of ability. This was done -- to a degree -- to maitain "backwards compatibility" with previous editions of the game.
Third, Rangers that want to be extra good with bows can always take the various archery feats (Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, etc.). If you feel strongly about the Ranger class needing "free" archery ability, some searching online will turn up a number of alternative Ranger classes which may meet your neeeds.
A Ranger's first Favored Enemy is the one which will be most powerful at high levels. Therefore, you want to choose a 1st-level Favored Enemy which scales well. You want a Favored Enemy that is likely to show up across a wide variety of adventures and levels. Therefore, I recommend the following choices: Aberrations, Beasts, Dragons, Giants, and Magical Beasts. Some of the other choices are pretty good, but these categories include a wide variety of creatures with a good range of CRs.
Yes, absolutely. Each and every one of a rogue's attacks (including Attacks of Opportunity) can be a Sneak Attack, assuming the normal Sneak Attack conditions are satisfied. For example, a 20th-level rogue with the Improved Two-Weapon Fighting feat can make a total of five Sneak Attacks (each doing +10d6 points of bonus damage) in one round if he takes the Full-Attack action against an opponent that he flanks.
No. Sneak Attacks can be done if either one of two criteria are met: The defender is denied his Dex bonus to AC, or the attacker is flanking the defender.
The second Uncanny Dodge ability (can't be flanked) pretty much eliminates the second criteria for a Sneak Attack. However, a much higher-level Rogue can still flank someone with that Uncanny Dodge ability; read the Uncanny Dodge description in the PH for details.
The first Uncanny Dodge ability (Dex bonus to AC) only allows a character to keep his Dex bonus to AC while flatfooted or versus unseen/invisible attackers. This often eliminates one of the criteria for Sneak Attacking, but there are plenty of ways to eliminate a character's Dex bonus to AC that Uncanny Dodge doesn't protect from. For example, a stunned opponent loses his Dex bonus to AC versus all attackers, and a grappled opponent loses his Dex bonus to AC versus attackers that he is not grappling. Therefore, a rogue could Sneak Attack in those situations.
The upshot is that even a 1st-level Rogue can Sneak Attack a 20th-level Barbarian if, for example, the Rogue's Fighter friend is grappling the Barbarian. Team up and use those Sneak Attacks!
Yes. Any attack that does regular or subdual damage can be a sneak attack (provided it satisfies the rest of the sneak attack requirements). This includes lots of ranged and regular touch attack spells.
Monte Cook brought up an interesting point about this: Allowing touch spells (ranged or otherwise) to deliver sneak attack damage might a bit unbalancing. Sneak Attacks are balanced by the fact that they are relatively difficult to deliver with a rogue's typically low attack bonus. Touch attacks, however, are extremely easy to deliver, thereby allowing rogues to bypass one of their limitations. Still, the rules as written do allow touch attacks to deliver sneak attack damage.
No, you are not limited to communicating via emotions. Empathic Link allows "communicate telepathically," which is mental conversation.
Since Empathic Link is a supernatural ability (as mentioned in the ability description), it takes a standard action to use. See the "Use Special Ability" subsection of the "Magic Actions" section of the Combat chapter in the PH for more details on using supernatural abilities.
Well, yes, you do gain Empathic Link at 1st-level. However, Empathic Link is a supernatural ability and therefore takes a standard action to use in a combat situation. Speak with Master allows verbal communication, which is a free action. Therefore, communicating with your familiar in a combat situation (which is necessary when using your familiar to deliver a touch spell) is much faster and easier once you gain the Speak with Master ability.
According to the definition of supernatural abilities in the PH, Empathic Link does not "function in areas where magic is supressed or negated, such as inside an antimagic field." Speak with Master is an extraordinary ability, and can be used in those situations.
No. In fact, familiars don't really gain Hit Dice; they simply have higher Hit Dice as their master gains levels.
The PH says "use the basic statistics for a creature of its type ... but make these changes." The list of changes does not include increased stats, skills, or feats. Likewise, the PH says "familiars have special abilities ... depending on the level of their master." The list of special abilities also does not impart extra stats, feats, or skills.
A familiar's abilities (from table 3-19 in the PH) are directly tied to his master's class level in wizard (or sorcerer). If the master loses levels in wizard (or sorcerer), the familiar's abilities are reduced to match the master's new wizard (or sorcerer) level on Table 3-19.
A familiar's HD and hp are directly tied to his master's overall character level. If the master loses levels in any of his classes, the familiar's HD are reduced by the same amount, and the familiar's hp should be recalculated based on the master's new hp.
Intimidate is intended to be a verbal/social skill. One of its uses is interrogation (making a prisoner give you information). Therefore, Intimidate isn't so much forcing an opponent to run away just because you've got lots of muscles. Rather, it is convincing him that (despite any outward appearance) you are not someone to be messed with. Since an outward display of personal magnitude is necessary, Charisma is a fine key stat for Intimidate.
If you still feel that Strength is a more appropriate key stat, take a look at the "Variant: Skills with Different Abilities" section of the Running the Game chapter of the DMG. It contains some guidelines which may help.
Yes, you can tumble during a double move, run, charge, or spring attack. For a run or charge, however, you may have to convince your DM that you are still moving in a straight line (one of the preconditions for running and charging).
Any movement you make (regardless of how you make it) could conceivably be a tumble. The only limitation is the maximum of 20 feet of tumbling per round.
Source: email conversation with Sage Advice.
Yes. You may break up the 20 feet of tumbling into separate segments. Each segment requires a separate tumble check. Source: email conversation with Sage Advice.
You are confusing "full-round" actions with "1 full round" casting times; they are different things.
Spontaneous casting of a metamagic 1 action spell does turn it into a full-round action. However, this only means that the caster cannot take a move-equivalent action before or after casting. Such a spell takes effect immediately on the caster's action; he does not suffer the chance of being disrupted for a whole round the way casting a 1 full round spell would. Source: email conversation with Sage Advice.
Yes. You can use the same metamagic feat multiple times on one spell, but each use increases the spell's level appropriately. The enlarged enlarged magic missile would require a 3rd-level spell slot and would have a range three times as long (see the PH appendix for rules on multipliers).
Yes. Without Ambidexterity, ranged attacks made with your off hand suffer the standard -4 penalty. With Ambidexterity, ranged off hand attacks do not suffer the -4 penalty. The rules are fairly clear on the matter, but if you need some more proof, check out the the description of the heavy crossbow in the Equipment chapter; it expressly allows Ambidexterity to affect ranged attacks.
See the Combat section of the FAQ for a discussion on whether fighting with two weapons sucks.
Yes. See the Combat section of the FAQ for the requirements for taking a full attack action with thrown weapons.
No. See the Combat section of the FAQ for the requirements for taking a full attack action with bows and slings.
No. Reloading a crossbow is always at least a move-equivalent action. Quickdraw does not allow you to speed up a crossbow's reload time.
Quickdraw allows you to draw one or more weapons on your turn and still have enough time to make multiple melee or thrown attacks.
Yes. The Quicken Spell feat is useless to Sorcerers, Bards, or any other class that casts spells spontaneously.
No, although they put the rule in a very strange place. The description of the heavy crossbow in the Equipment chapter says, "the Two-Weapon Fighting feat ... represents skill with melee weapons, not ranged weapons."
See the Combat section of the FAQ for a discussion on whether fighting with two weapons sucks.
No, your second hand does not need to be empty. You can carry a weapon, torch, magic item, or anything else in your second hand while you are using Weapon Finesse. Note however that -- according to the feat description -- you might suffer a penalty to attack rolls if you use a shield in your second hand while using Weapon Finesse.
The sentence in the feat description which talks about needing "your second hand for balance" is just flavor text.
No. None of the races give you free Exotic Weapon Proficiencies. Even if your race matches your weapon, you must still have the appropriate Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat to use the weapon without the -4 non-proficiency penalty.
Read the "Weapon Categories" subsection of the Combat chapter. D&D has a very elegant system for determining how many hands a character must use to wield a weapon. You probably missed it the first time you read the Player's Handbook. You did actually read the Player's Handbook, right?
Neither one is "better" than the other. They do have different behaviors and advantages in certain situations, but two weapons (say longsword and battle axe) that are identical except for their threat range and crit multiplier basically end up doing the same average damage per round. Some people prefer the frequency of crits that high threat range weapons give, while other people like the obscene amounts of damage that high crit multiplier weapons do. In the long run, they both do virtually identical amounts of damage.
I'm working on an essay/analysis of Threat Range and Crit Multipliers. When it's posted, you'll be able to see the math behind this answer.
Note to self: incorporate this stuff 0.05 => 0 0.95 => 2 0.05 => 0 0.95 => 1 1.00 => 0 round 1: 5% chance of killing round 2: 5% (x95%) chance of killing round 3: dead (.05 x 1) + (.0475 x 2) + (.9025 x 3) = 0.05 + 0.095 + 2.7075 = 2.8525 rounds to kill with a x3 crit weapon 0.10 => 1 1.00 => 0 0.90 => 2 0.10 => 0 0.90 => 1 1.00 => 0 (.10 x 2) + (.90 x .10 x 2) + (.90 x .90 x 3) = 0.2 + 0.18 + 2.43 = 2.81 rounds to kill with a x2 crit weapon
Wrong. See my analysis of Threat Range and Crit Multiplier (forthcoming) for details.
The main advantage is that they crit more frequently. Many players like that consistency. They also have a smaller chance of wasting damage by "overkilling" a foe. They make much better Vorpal weapons, since the lethality of a Vorpal weapon is based purely on the weapon's Threat Range.
The main disadvantage is that when enhanced by Improved Critical and/or Keen Edge, a high Threat Range on a weapon may overlap with the natural chance of missing your target, and certain threats may thus be wasted.
The main advantage is that they do more damage on a crit. Many players like the ability/chance to kill an opponent a round or two quicker than someone with a high threat range weapon. That round or two might allow your party to save a few spells, magic items, or even their own lives. They are also better at Coup de Graces, since those are automatic criticals.
The main disadvantage is that they have a higher chance of wasting damage by "overkilling" a foe on a critical.
Unless otherwise specified in the weapon description, reloading a missile weapon (like a short bow, sling, or composite longbow) takes no time. It is a free action.
No. Although you use both of your hands to wield a two-handed weapon, it is not considered an off-hand weapon, and you therefore do not suffer the penalty. You do still lose the buckler's AC bonus on the round in which you attack with your two-handed weapon, however.
The deafness is permanent until cured. Source: email conversation with Sage Advice.
Many people believe that makes Thunderstones too powerful for their price. Such people change the duration to temporary: 1 hour, 1 day, or something similar.
A full answer to that question is above and beyond the scope of this FAQ, unless somebody volunteers to write one for me. In the mean time, take a look at Eric Noah's explanation of Movement and Attacks of Opportunity. Wizards of the Coast also has a Role Models PDF available for download which explains certain aspects of Attacks of Opportunity.
You get neither a standard action nor a partial action. All you get is an attack. By the definition in the PH glossary, an attack is anything you can resolve with an attack roll. In addition to a "normal" attack (an attempt to damage your foe or his gear), an AoO allows you to trip, grapple, disarm, or anything else resolved with an attack roll.
An AoO does not allow you to cast a spell, move, drink a potion, draw a weapon, or any other type of action. You may not perform free actions (like drawing a weapon with the Quickdraw feat) during an AoO, since free actions can only be performed on your turn.
Yes. You may take Attacks of Opportunity even if you are unarmed. You don't have to be a Monk, nor are you required to have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. As usual, making an unarmed strike against an armed attacker draws an AoO.
Yes, usually. Drawing a weapon without the Quickdraw feat (even if it is a thrown weapon) is a move-equivalent action, and taking a move-equivalent action on your turn limits you to just one attack. The Quickdraw feat allows you to draw weapons as a free action, thereby letting you take a full attack on your turn.
If you already have two (or more) throwable weapons drawn, you can throw any or all of those in a full attack action even if you don't have the Quickdraw feat.
No. Most missile weapons take no time to reload, so taking the full attack action permits you to shoot as many arrows (or fire as many sling bullets) as your Base Attack Bonus and feats (like Rapid Shot) allow.
The long answer can be found in my Analysis of Attacking with Two Weapons. Here are some highlights:
1) Not all fighting styles (or feat choices) are supposed to be optimal for all characters. Fighting with two-weapons is usually an inferior choice for the typical high strength fighter. That's okay.
2) Attacking with two weapons doesn't always suck. Consider a rogue that fights with two weapons; he can do way more sneak attack damage compared to a rogue that fights with just one weapon. Rogues darn well better have to spend two feats to get that good!
3) Attacking with two weapons gives you more raw attacks. That can be useful when the quantity of attacks is more important than the amount of damage. You might want to use those attacks to trip, disarm, bull rush, or otherwise hamper a bunch of foes.
No. You only suffer the penalties for attacking with two weapons. Since you didn't actually attack with one of the weapons, you aren't considered to be attacking with two weapons and therefore suffer none of the penalties. Exception: Unless you have the Ambidexterity feat, you still suffer a -4 penalty when attacking with your off-hand, even if you are only attacking with one weapon.
Yes, you may take Attacks of Opportunity while performing a full-round action. The description of full-round actions does not preclude AoOs, so you may take them. Your DM may decide, however, that certain full-round actions or certain circumstances preclude your character from taking AoOs.
Yes, you may take AoOs on rounds that you are using Total Defense. By the rules, there is no modifier to your AoO, although an email conversation with Sage Advice suggested that the same -4 penalty as Fighting Defensively would be appropriate.
No. You can only flank with melee weapons. One of the criteria for flanking is that you threaten the target with your weapon, and ranged weapons do not threaten an area.
No. You only get a +2 flanking bonus to your attack roll when an ally threatens your foe from the directly opposite side. It doesn't matter if you have two, three, four, or more allies attacking the target or whether they get flanking bonuses. One of them must be directly opposite you in order for you to receive the bonus.
No. You get to keep your shield bonus to AC in those situations. That may not seem "realistic", but consider these two facts:
1) The simple act of holding a shield offers the holder a certain amount of protection. An unseen attacker has that much less surface area to attack.
2) Unless the defender is helpless (a specific condition defined in the PH glossary), he is still assumed to be somewhat defensively aware, even versus an invisible attacker with surprise. In these sorts of situations, the defender does lose his Dex bonus to AC, but he is not treated as having a Dex of zero. Therefore, the game does assume he is defending to the best of his ability.
There is no concept of "facing" in the D&D combat rules, nor is there a specific attack bonus for attacking from behind. Your opponent is assumed to be turning as necessary to meet your attack.
You can, however, flank your opponent to receive a +2 bonus to your attacks. If you are effectively invisible (possibly by sneaking up) to your opponent, he loses his Dex bonus to AC and you get an additional +2 bonus to your attack roll. That's the closest thing to a bonus for attacking from behind.
There are no called shots in D&D. D&D's abstract hit point system is not designed to handle attacks at specific parts of the body. The closest thing the rules provide are the mechanics for disarming your opponent, sundering her weapon, or attacking a held object, all of which are discussed in the Combat chapter of the PH.
If you still want to incorporate called shots into your game, the "Variant: Damage to Specific Areas" section of the Running the Game chapter of the DMG has some guidelines which can help adjudicate the effects of called shots.
Delay has its uses. If you want to take an action this round, but you need to wait a short time for strategic purposes, Delay can be invaluable. Consider this example:
Tordek and Mialee come across a group of gnolls. Initiative is rolled, and Tordek goes first followed by Mialee and lastly the gnolls. Rather than charging into combat, Tordek delays his action. He waits for Mialee to cast her fireball, and soften up the gnolls so he can wade in and use his Cleave feat with great effectiveness on the weakened gnolls. (Thanks to Rick Fieldhouse for the example)
Well, Refocus is the only way to delay your action from one round to another. You might choose to Delay on a particular round, but you must do something before the round ends. If you really don't want to do anything, you can choose to Refocus. This usually lets you act first on the next round, and you can choose to Delay again.
A weapon-based trip attack can only be made with weapons that explicitly allow it in their descriptions (like a flail or guisarme). You cannot make trip attacks with other weapons (like longsword, battle axe, or heavy mace).
Trip attacks may also be made without a weapon. In fact, that's the default way to make a trip attack. If you want to make a trip attack without a weapon, you do not need a free hand; you are making the trip attack with your whole body. You are not considered "unarmed" when making a trip attack in this way; you do not draw an AoO as a result.
Source: Email clarification from Sage Advice and Sean Reynolds.
Using a trip weapon provides a few benefits: If you fail to trip your opponent, you can drop the weapon to avoid being tripped in return. You can use feats like Weapon Focus, as well as the weapon's enhancement or masterwork bonuses on your melee touch attack when tripping. Some weapons let you trip from 10 feet away.
No. Allowing PCs to "bank" their feats, would cause the existance of normally impossible characters like a 2nd-level rogue with Weapon Finesse, or a 5th-level wizard with both Craft Wand and Craft Magic Arms and Armor.
No. You must spend all of your skill points when you gain a level.
It depends. Spells that require concentration usually end when the caster is incapacitated or killed. Spells with a timed duration, however, only end when the duration runs out irrespective of whether the caster remains conscious.
Yes. See the Summon Monster section of the FAQ for details.
Yes. See the Summon Monster section of the FAQ for details.
Yes. See the Summon Monster section of the FAQ for details.
Yes. See the Summon Monster section of the FAQ for details.
The rules don't say. There are several ways to handle it:
1) The cleric doesn't get the free Weapon Focus feat. After all, she doesn't have a deity, so she therefore has no favored weapon. This is the most restrictive option, and I don't recommend using it.
2) The cleric may choose any simple weapon.
3) The cleric may choose any simple weapon or any of the weapons matching her alignment as listed in the Spiritual Weapon spell.
4) The cleric may choose any simple or martial weapon. This is the least restrictive option, and the one I recommend the highest. In fact, I believe Save Advice recommended this option.
Yes, the caster of bless counts as his own "ally", and therefore benefits from the effects of the spell. The same applies to any other spell which affects the caster's allies.
Yes, the tentacles get normal Attacks of Opportunity for creatures moving through their threatened area. Source: email conversation with Sage Advice.
No, you should not take that part of the spell description literally. Tentacles can attack nothing smaller than a Medium-size creature, regardless of whether the potential target is an "object" or a "creature." Small creatures, therefore, cannot be attacked by Evard's Black Tentacles. Source: email conversation with Sage Advice.
Well, yes, Flame Arrow does require an attack roll, and the Fiery Bolts mode allows a saving throw, but this doesn't necessarily mean Flame Arrow is weak. The two other major 3rd-level damaging spells (fireball and lightning bolt) give the target only one way to avoid damage, but then again those two spells are limited to 10d6 points of damage. Flame Arrow allows up to 20d6 points of damage. Flame Arrow has the additional flexibility of the Flaming Normal Projectiles mode. What the spell lacks in avoidability, it gains in flexibility and damage potential.
If, however, you feel that the spell still sucks, you could eliminate either the saving throw or the attack roll for the Fiery Bolts mode. If that makes you happy, more power to you. Literally.
Yes, Harm is powerful. Heck, it's a 6th-level spell; it should be powerful. Slay Living is one level lower; it requires a touch attack and allows a saving throw. Destruction is one level higher; it is usable at range, does not require an attack roll and allows a saving throw. Harm fits in nicely between those two. It doesn't instantly kill the target like the other two spells, but it is pretty darn similar.
The problem people have with Harm is that the chance of successfully delivering a touch attack is higher than the chance of your foe failing his save. Essentially, spells that are delivered by touch are more likely to be successful than those that allow saving throws. This is particularly true against very powerful opponents like Dragons which have very low touch ACs, but very high saving throws. DMs don't like it when PCs can easily eliminate tough opponents with just one touch. If you are similarly concerned about Harm, here are some ways to change it:
1) Allow a Fortitude partial save. If the save succeeds, the target still takes 6d6 points of damage +1 poin t per caster level.
2) The spell can remove no more than 100 of the target's hit points.
3) The spell can only affect targets that currently have 100 or fewer hit points. If the target currently has more than 100 hit points, the spell has no effect.
4) Delivering the spell requires an attack roll versus the target's normal AC, not just a touch attack. This is my personal favorite.
Harm can also be controlled through roleplaying restrictions. Good deities could occasionally restrict access to Harm because it is like channeling negative energy. I cannot, however, recommend this sort of balancing mechanism because players dislike seemingly arbitrary DM decisions, and because neutral clerics would have an easy way to bypass the restriction.
You get an extra partial action immediately, on the same turn that you cast haste. Spell durations begin immediately after casting, and haste is no exception.
Well, that sentence doesn't have much impact on wizards and sorcerers using the spell, but it does affect clerics. Clerics cannot cast spells which oppose either their alignment or their deity's alignment. For example, a Neutral Good cleric of Hieroneous (who is Lawful Good) can cast neither chaotic nor evil spells. Such a cleric could not use the Summon Monster I spell to summon a celestial badger, a fiendish dire rat, or a fiendish hawk (each of whom is chaotic and/or evil) because the spell would be chaotic and/or evil and thus violate the cleric's restriction. That cleric can still use Summon Monster I to summon a celestial dog, since its alignment does not violate the restriction.
Additionally, a cleric's domain power for the Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos domains allows him to cast such spells at +1 caster level. The durations of Summon Monster spells are dependent on caster level, so a cleric with a domain that matches the summoned creature's alignment gets one extra round of use from the spell. For example, if a 3rd-level cleric with the Chaos domain summons a celestial badger, the spell lasts four rounds instead of the usual three.
The rules do not explicitly permit summoning other kinds of creatures. You should consult with your DM to find out whether she will allow it.
I'm afraid there is no perfect formula for determining what level spell is appropriate for a given summoned creature. You must examine the creature and compare it to the ones already on the lists. Trial and error should serve you well: Choose a suitable level and put the creature there. After a few uses you may determine that the creature should be moved up or down a level.
You should not use a creatures HD or CR as the sole determining factor for what level spell is appropriate. HD and CR are not a good measure for how useful a summoned creature is. Not all summoned creatures are used for fighting, and non-combat abilities should be considered in your determination. For example, a CR 1 creature that can cast teleport at will should probably be on the 6th-level list, or maybe even higher.
I'm afraid there is no perfect formula. The best way is to find a similar creature on Table 2-4 or do your best to estimate. Do not use the monster's CR by itself as measure of how powerful it would be as a PC race. Challenge Ratings are designed to measure how tough a monster is for PCs to fight, not how useful such a monster would be in a party.
It's a slightly different (and specialized) application of the Spot skill, so it doesn't have to match the mechanics in the PH precisely.
Your character's Con (or any other stat) can be reduced all the way to zero. Ability damage and drain reduce your whole stat, including bonuses from spells and items. This happens because bonuses stack with penalties, even if they are the same type.
You may use the aid another action in combat to slap someone awake; see the "Special Attacks and Damage" section of the Combat chapter of the PH. That, unfortunately, is the only specific rule the game has on waking up from sleep. There are no rules for how sleeping characters make listen checks nor how quickly they can join combat. Here's how I do it in my campaign:
Make a listen check with a -10 circumstance penalty. If you beat the DC of the noise (see the Listen skill description), you are awake. You may make an Initiative check with a -4 circumstance penalty at the end of the round to see when you act the following round. Since you were probably prone, you'll have to spend a move-equivalent action to get up. You will probably also need to spend one or more actions to ready your equipment.
You may discover that your party has too easy of a time defeating monsters with a CR equal to the party's average level. That isn't because the CRs for the monsters are wrong. Your party is probably more powerful than the standard parties that were used to determine CRs. That's okay, and it doesn't mean that the CR system is useless to you.
You should experiment with monsters of a higher CR. Chances are, your party will be suitably challenged by monsters with CR one or possibly two higher than the party's average level. Once you find the right amount, the CRs become usable and meaningful to you again.
Wrong on two counts.
First, twelve Orcs aren't necessarily an EL 5 encounter. The EL determination system starts breaking down once you start combining eight or more weak creatures. See the end of the "Challenge Ratings and Encounter Levels" section of the DMG for more details on this point.
Second, Encounter Levels are not designed for monster vs. monster encounters. Two groups of EL 5 monsters aren't necessarily evenly matched for one another. The EL determines an appropriate challenge for PCs, not other monsters. PCs have very predictable, balanced, well-scaled abilities, whereas monsters have a wide spectrum of abilities at widely different power levels.
You can find lots of cases where you'd have a very lopsided battle between two different monsters with identical CRs: Manticore vs. Girallon, Carrion Crawler vs. Tiger, Wererat vs. Ape, etc. Therefore, you should not use their CRs (and resulting ELs) for anything other than what they were intended.
Simply speaking, your party is more powerful than the ones the CRs were playtested with. Your party might have more members than the standard party of four, or they might have higher stats, or they might have more magic items. The Challenge Ratings were assigned based on a party of four PCs with stats generated from the Default Array (see "Ability Scores Generation" in Chapter 2 of the DMG) and an amount of gear as outlined in Table 2-24 in the DMG.
It's obvious if your party has more than four members, and a bit of math will tell you whether your party has more than the standard amount of magic items, but how do you determine if their stats are higher than "normal"? The easiest way is to use Table 2-1 in the DMG to determine how much your PCs' stats are worth from the point buy method. Remember to remove the PC's racial stat modifiers before calculating the point total. If a PC's stats are worth more than 25 points, it is more powerful than a PC from the standard party. Though it may not seem like much, a PC with a point buy total of 32 is considerably more powerful than a standard PC.
Here's a cool method that Monte Cook recommended:
"Figure out how much a character of about the party's level would earn in a straight up encounter (4 PCs of X level facing X CR). Then, determine how much you you would need to give a player that big a reward if you divided by your actual number of players. Then, find the xp amount on the table that matches that number the best.
For example, say you've got 6 6th level players. If there were 4 of them, and they had a CR 6 encounter, they'd each get 450 xp. 450 times 6 is 2700, which--if you reference the table--is the xp amount for a CR 7 encounter.
So it's about +1 CR higher for 6 players and +2 for 8."
You can simplify this technique into one which can even be used for a party of mixed levels. Add up all the levels for all the PCs and multiply by 75. This is the amount of xp one typical encounter should provide. Next, figure out the party's average level (rounded down) and consult Table 7-1 in the DMG to find a CR which will yield that much xp. The CR is the appropriate Encounter Level for the party.
In many cases, you won't be able to find a CR on the table which matches the appropriate xp total exactly. Use your best judgement as to whether to round up or down.
Here's how this technique would work for the following party of six PCs: A 7th-level Wizard, a 4th-level Rogue, a 4th-level Bard, a 3rd-level Fighter, a 3rd-level Cleric, and a 2nd-level Paladin. The total number of levels in the party is 23. The amount of xp they should receive in a typical encounter is 75 x 23 = 1725. The party's average level is 23 / 6 = 3.83, which rounds down to 3. Consulting Table 7-1, a 3rd-level party can earn 1800 xp for a CR 5 encounter. That's pretty close to the 1725 xp they'd need, so they should be able to handle EL 5 encounters.
One last note: It is difficult to balance encounters for a group of PCs with a wide range of levels. In the above example, the 7th-level Wizard would have a relatively easy time in the typical encounter, but the 2nd- and 3rd-level characters could be easily killed. Therefore, you should exercise caution when using this Encounter Level estimation method.
No. Save DCs from magic items are calculated according to the "Saving Throws Against Magic Item Powers" section of the Magic Items chapter of the DMG.
No. Source: email conversation with Sage Advice.
According to a number of email rulings from the Sage, the +1d10 fire damage from the burst on a crit replaces the +1d6 fire damage that such a weapon does on a normal hit. Therefore, assuming no bonuses to damage other than the sword's abilities, a +1 flaming burst longsword would do the following damage on a crit:
2d8 + 2 (base longsword crit damage) + 1d10 (burst)
I, for one, believe the Sage made the incorrect ruling. I believe both the +1d6 and +1d10 damages should apply on a crit. If not, the flaming burst ability is drastically overpriced. Flaming burst costs an additional +1 over and above the cost of flaming. With the Sage's ruling, a flaming burst weapon's only advantage (compared to an otherwise identical flaming weapon) is that it does an average of two points extra damage on a crit. Why bother paying a +1 for that ability when you could add an additional normal +1 to the weapon? An additional normal +1 does the same two points of extra damage on a crit, inflicts one point of extra damage on a regular hit, increases the odds of hitting, and bypasses Damage Reduction better.
I had an email exchange with the Sage about this a couple months ago, but he hasn't responded to my last few messages. The designer of the flaming burst ability (Monte Cook) has confirmed that the Sage's ruling goes against what the flaming burst ability was designed to do. If and when I can get a revised ruling from the Sage, this FAQ entry will be updated.
The price for the Flame Tongue is a mistake. It should be 18,315 gp. Likewise, the cost to create should be 9315 gp and 720 xp.
Wrong. Flaming and flaming burst do not stack. The fact that the Flame Tongue is listed as having both powers is an error. It should be treated as a +1 flaming burst longsword, and its price should be 18,315 gp.
No, an item's caster level is not a prerequisite. In fact, the creator gets to set the caster level to whatever she desires, within certain limits as outlined in the DMG. That particular sentence should have read, "the creator cannot set an item's caster level to be higher than her own caster level."
An item's prerequisites are listed clearly in every item's description. If caster level is a prerequisite, the item description will say so. Most items do not have caster level prerequisites.
Also, check out Monte Cook's Making Magic Items FAQ for even more details on prerequisites for magic items.
Table 8-40 is not really a way to calculate a magic item's price. Rather, it is a way to help estimate a magic item's price. You cannot use simple formulas to determine an appropriate price for a magic item. Read the "Behind the Curtain: Magic Item Gold Piece Values" for some insight in how to price items.
Monte Cook's Making Magic Items FAQ offers a bunch of additional clarification and insight on creating magic items.
No. Staves, wands, and other charged magic items cannot be recharged. When they run out of charges, they crumble into useless dust.
While there is no rule that explicitly prevents recharging, there is also no rule that permits it.
Monte Cook's Making Magic Items FAQ offers some insight on this topic.