Hello!
>The spell uses your spell attack bonus and save DC, and the spell treats the creature who released it as the caster for all other purposes.
Does this mean the creature also needs a focus/component pouch for the M component of the spell? I
Also see MPEP 804
A complete response to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection is either a reply by applicant showing that the claims subject to the rejection are patentably distinct from the reference claims or the filing of a terminal disclaimer in accordance with 37 CFR 1.321 in the pending application(s) with a reply to the Office action (see MPEP § 1490 for a discussion of terminal disclaimers). Such a response is required even when the nonstatutory double patenting rejection is provisional.
As filing a terminal disclaimer, or filing a showing that the claims subject to the rejection are patentably distinct from the reference application’s claims, is necessary for further consideration of the rejection of the claims, such a filing should not be held in abeyance. Only objections or requirements as to form not necessary for further consideration of the claims may be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated. Replies with an omission should be treated as provided in MPEP § 714.03.Therefore, an application must not be allowed unless the required compliant terminal disclaimer(s) is/are filed and/or the withdrawal of the nonstatutory double patenting rejection(s) is made of record by the examiner. See MPEP § 804.02, subsection VI, for filing terminal disclaimers required to overcome nonstatutory double patenting rejections in applications filed on or after June 8, 1995.
from: gaming poetry / warring possibilities / creative detente
John le Strange was created Baron Strange in 1299. Thomas Stanley was created Earl of Derby in 1485. Due to marriage between their issue, the titles were united, so that Ferdinando Stanley (b. 1559) was the 5th Earl of Derby and the 13th Baron Strange. On Fernando's death in 1594, the titles were inherited by his younger brother William. Or, at least, the earldom was. Fernando had no sons to inherit the earldom, but he did have daughters, and the barony was created by writ, which means that it passes through both male and female lines. The baronetcy should have gone to his daughter.
The error was not discovered till 1628, at which point it was deemed that there were now two baronetcies Strange, the second one having been created "accidentally". However, the first baronetcy was not revived: the daughter who should had inherited it (or her issue), was not declared Baroness. It remained "in abeyance" until 1921. Why the long delay?
The accidentally created barony also fell into abeyance a few times, but was always revived within a generation.
(This is what happens when you follow Wikipedia rabbit holes about Parliamentary procedure and try to work out what a writ of acceleration is.)
Hi all,
So I have never really dealt with rituals in Pathfinder 2e yet so I could be completely off base but I have a question. I am reading the ritual rules in the core rulebook and this line seems to conflict with the "Fey Abeyance" ritual: "A different secondary caster must attempt each secondary check. If there are more secondary casters than checks, the others don’t attempt any."
So since a different secondary caster has to attempt each check, and it appears to have 4 required checks "Secondary Checks: Crafting, intimidation, occultism, performance," wouldnt that mean the minimum amount of secondary casters is 4, not 1 like it has listed in the entry?
Any help anyone can provide would be appreciated, it could just be a typo in the book, but I can't find any threads on this topic. Thank you all.
So I'm in a campaign nearing the end of what the DM had prepared and we want to extend it a little bit. I am currently running a chronurgy wizard who is chaotic neutral and has been slowly going crazy by messing with time over the course of the campaign, so I'm going to flip out and start running guerrilla warfare against the party.
So my question is: is there anything from preventing me from making a suicide fireball bomber hawk by using my hawk familiar, giving it a arcane abeyance mote filled with level 4 fireball, and instructing it to fly a mile away to the enemy party, land in their camp, and activate the fireball mote?
abeyance: expectancy
See tree for abeyance: https://treegledictionary.org/define/abeyance
A new Chronurgy spell to hopefully spice up your games!
Hi guys,
I have a question about one of the traits of the wizard subclass - Chronurgy Magic, Arcane Abeyance,
the skill in question says:
When you cast a spell using a spell slot of 4th level or lower, you can condense the spell's magic into a mote. The spell is frozen in time at the moment of casting and held within a gray bead for 1 hour. This bead is a Tiny object with AC 15 and 1 hit point, and it is immune to poison and psychic damage. When the duration ends, or if the bead is destroyed, it vanishes in a flash of light, and the spell is lost.
A creature holding the bead can use its action to release the spell within, whereupon the bead disappears. The spell uses your spell attack bonus and save DC, and the spell treats the creature who released it as the caster for all other purposes.
Once you create a bead with this feature, you can’t do so again until you finish a short or long rest.
The question is, can a spell cast with this ability be the target of Counterspell? (as according to the description it is not exactly casted)
Hello again,
I stumbled over Arcane Abeyance and wanted to ask if it is as potent as I think.
If I understand correctly, there is no limit on how many motes I can create other then my spell slots, is that correct?
Assuming I understand it correctly, isn't that nearly gamebreakingly good, if I can predict fights even halfway decent? (Emphasize on "if I can predict it")
For example, I know we have to get rid of a single strong enemy and a few minutes to prepare. I can give a mote of Haste to a fighter and a barbarian. Since the spell works as cast by them, they have to hold the concentration and with boosted ac and good con they should be able to do so. In addition I give my familiar a mote of fly, so I can fly without concentration and can rain destruction from above (or at least be the less reachable target and can cast another concentration spell)
Am I overstimating the power or is it really that good? (I am sure there are even better uses, the example above is just what came to me first when thinking about it)
Edit: Since I didn't took the fineprint of 1 per rest into account, what about spells that take more then 1 action? Is there an official ruling that the spell takes effect imideatly or if it needs time to "grow"?
If so, that makes you the most potent arcane terrorist out there, doing 1920d6 damage total. In fact, if you don't use UA, you are doing the most damage possible.
