Memory Lapse
School enchantment [mind-affecting]; Level bard 1, sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one living creature
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance yes
You cause the target to forget what happened from the casting of the spell back to the beginning of its last turn. This may allow a retry on a Diplomacy, Intimidate, or opposed skill check, though only with respect to the target, not other creatures that may be present.
Seems straightforward enough right?
First I want to say that I love this spell. I think it might be a little too good for first level, but no matter.
My question is about the bolded segment. If the spell is used outside of an initiative context, does it cause the target to forget the last 6 seconds?
I'm always frustrated when new game features presume that all abilities are combat-abilities foremost. Memory lapse has incredible utility outside of the combat round (think about interrogations... maybe the Inquisitor should get this one.)
I also hope the second sentence in the description is merely clarification and not a limitation.
Does anyone read this as implying the spell can't be used out of combat or can only be used to retry skills?
I would say the last six seconds would be a logical ruling. Otherwise, the old geezer forgets everything all the way back to the last time he was in combat, twenty years ago fighting that dragon.
I have to say this spell has problems. If it only works for a single turn or the last six seconds using for diplomacy or intimidate (to change a creatures attitude) shouldn't work as those skills take one minute, unless the last six seconds is all that really matters. :-P
As for limitations, I think the last sentence may well be designed to say you get to make those re-rolls even is the diplomacy or intimidate took longer than six seconds. I don't view it as a definitive list of allowable actions. Of course it throws it right into the GM's court as to what it could possibly do.
I have to say this spell has problems. If it only works for a single turn or the last six seconds using for diplomacy or intimidate (to change a creatures attitude) shouldn't work as those skills take one minute, unless the last six seconds is all that really matters.
Not to change attitude, but it works as written for other diplomacy checks. Such as making a request of a creature, which can take 1 round (depending on the complexity of the request) and normally you can't try that request again. With a cast of Memory Lapse, you can, since the target doesn't remember you making the request, getting tongue tied, and inadvertently insulting his mother.
I would say the last six seconds would be a logical ruling. Otherwise, the old geezer forgets everything all the way back to the last time he was in combat, twenty years ago fighting that dragon.
I have to say this spell has problems. If it only works for a single turn or the last six seconds using for diplomacy or intimidate (to change a creatures attitude) shouldn't work as those skills take one minute, unless the last six seconds is all that really matters. :-P
I agree in both cases.
In the second case, I imagine the spell will see far more use as a contingency for bungled charm attempts and a bit of initiative hacking (suckerpunch, memory lapse, suckerpunch, memory lapse)...
Still, this spell seems incredibly fun with high potential for creativity. I hope some errata clear it up a bit without ruining the fun part.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I wrote that one, and while I do not issue official errata, I think part of the limiting factor that makes it work as a 1st level spell is that it is a very short-term forgetfulness charm. Someone sees you (or an ally) when you're trying to Stealth? You bungle a Bluff or Intimidate or a request made with Diplomacy or whatever? You get a second chance. The easiest way to adjudicate this is within combat, but you could phrase it like this:
"... the beginning of its last turn (on initiative) or the beginning of the previous round (in non-combat situations)."
I think something like that clarifies the issue while not leaving it too open-ended (that's what modify memory is for, of course).
I included a retry on Diplomacy as an explicit inclusion to enable doing it without having to extend the spell's duration for other things.
As for the retrying diplomacy/bluff thing. Yes, these things often take longer than a minute to complete, but usually when you fail one of these checks it is due to making a critical mistake, and you usually know when you make a mistake. This spell lets you erase that mistake, and move forward.
Another use of this spell would be to force someone else to reroll a successful diplomacy or bluff check. Imagine a villan hiding nearby and using this spell to mess with the players....
I wrote that one, and while I do not issue official errata[.]
But you can speak for to writer's intent, I hope.
I still see problems with this as worded. You could only make the target forget something someone else did, as they forget only back to the beginning of their turn.
Round 1
Bumblebore tries to sneak past Bob the orc. Bob spots him.
Bob the orc stabs Bumblebore.
Round 2
Bumblebore casts memory lapse. Bob forgets he stabbed Bumblebore.
Bob the orc wonders why he didn't stab the mage. He stabs Bumblebore.
Round 3
Bumblebore casts memory lapse. Bob again forgets he stabbed Bumblebore.
Bob the orc wonders why the mage is covered in blood. He stabs Bumblebore.
Bumblebore dies. Bob goes and see the witchdoctor for a cure for his Alzheimer's.
It will only really work if the spell causes the target to forget everything back to the beginning of the caster's previous turn.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I wrote that one, and while I do not issue official errata[.]But you can speak for to writer's intent, I hope.
I still see problems with this as worded. You could only make the target forget something someone else did, as they forget only back to the beginning of their turn.
Round 1
Bumblebore tries to sneak past Bob the orc. Bob spots him.
Bob the orc stabs Bumblebore.Round 2
Bumblebore casts memory lapse. Bob forgets he stabbed Bumblebore.
Bob the orc wonders why he didn't stab the mage. He stabs Bumblebore.Round 3
Bumblebore casts memory lapse. Bob again forgets he stabbed Bumblebore.
Bob the orc wonders why the mage is covered in blood. He stabs Bumblebore.Bumblebore dies. Bob goes and see the witchdoctor for a cure for his Alzheimer's.
It will only really work if the spell causes the target to forget everything back to the beginning of the caster's previous turn.
Or:
Bob the orc walks by.
Bumblebore tries to sneak past (move action) and fails as Bob spots him. He finishes his move, going into another area of concealment, then casts ML (standard action). Bob the orc forgets that he ever saw someone walk past, which means Bumblebore can retry his Stealth check since he's not being directly observed by Bob (since Bob has no reason to be looking into the new concealment spot). Bob *does* get a Perception check to oppose Bumblebore's new Stealth roll.
Bob fails and keeps on walking.
(now, you could interpret that Bob is already looking at the new concealment spot since he saw Bumblebore go there; he doesn't know WHY he's looking that way, but he is - I say that's lame!)
The RAI is that the target of the spell essentially snaps back to doing whatever he was doing at the start of his last turn, as though its attention had never been drawn to the forgotten event in the first place.
If I'm looking out the front door, and I hear a creaky footstep behind me and turn around to look inside the house, if I get hit with this spell I go back to looking out the front door on my next turn because that's what I was already doing; I don't remain 'frozen' in my reaction pose to whatever DID happen that I forgot.
PF does include a lot of inferred action in its combat, perception, and social interaction systems, to say nothing of initiative and facing. The fact that you *notice* someone with Perception does not necessarily indicate that you see or turn towards them, since people in PF essentially are looking and facing in all directions simultaneously.
I don't think it's at all unreasonable to suppose that forgetting the events of a round would cause you to reset to your previous course of action, taking a split second to (figuratively) turn back around, even though facing doesn't exist, and "look the other way" since you now have no reason to have been looking that way in the first place.
In any case, even with all of the above stated, it's certainly a fair interpretation of the spell that it doesn't work for your own Stealth checks. You can certainly say they ARE looking your way, even though they don't know why, so they still can see you. In that case, at least for making people forget they saw a sneaker, the spell *IS* useful only to help others to sneak (or steal something), not yourself.
It can still be used along with CHA-based skills to enable rerolls.
Hey, it's a 1st level spell. It's supposed to be fun and useful, but at that level limitations are the name of the game.
Bob the orc walks by.
Bumblebore tries to sneak past (move action) and fails as Bob spots him. He finishes his move, going into another area of concealment, then casts ML (standard action).
True, but I was ignoring that case because it requires you to 'reserve' a standard action in case you fail your stealth check. No double moves for you my friend. Because if you fail on the second move action (or take some other standard action first) you don't have a standard action to save your butt.
So, the spell devolves down to being useful only on opposed skill checks in rounds where you take no other standard action or to help allies, provided that your turn falls between their turn and the enemy's turn. That seems like a major limitation. Not so much just limiting the power of spell, but limiting the usefulness in a particular situation based on game mechanics.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Bob the orc walks by.
Bumblebore tries to sneak past (move action) and fails as Bob spots him. He finishes his move, going into another area of concealment, then casts ML (standard action).
True, but I was ignoring that case because it requires you to 'reserve' a standard action in case you fail your stealth check. No double moves for you my friend. Because if you fail on the second move action (or take some other standard action first) you don't have a standard action to save your butt.
So, the spell devolves down to being useful only on opposed skill checks in rounds where you take no other standard action or to help allies, provided that your turn falls between their turn and the enemy's turn. That seems like a major limitation. Not so much just limiting the power of spell, but limiting the usefulness in a particular situation based on game mechanics.
Hey, as I said, 1st level spells are all about limitations. It has its uses and it's useful for them. If you want to give the spell a more generous inference, it's useful in more.
It's like a lot of spells; something you wouldn't necessarily prepare all the time, but handy to have for the right kind of mission.
A more robust 2nd level version would certainly be a reasonable thing to make. If memory serves, the 1st/2nd Ed forget spell affected all creatures in an area, and it may have made them forget stuff several rounds into the past. Either direction is a useful expansion of the spell's effect.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the intent of the spell was to make the target forget the last thing the mage did or said. To give the mage a do-over if you will.
As worded, it makes the target forget the last thing it did.
It's a subtle but profound difference.
So, the utility of spell doesn't rest with how powerful the result is, but rather on game mechanics, do you have standard action remaining or not.
I posted one example where it didn't help in the least. You pointed to the counter example of where it worked as intended. The problem is that the difference in whether it works or not isn't the power of the spell. It's how the wording of the spell interacts with the game mechanics.
It both cases the mage was spotted, he then immediate cast memory lapse. In one case, the enemy forgets he saw him (the desired result) in the other case the enemy just forgets how he reacted (not so useful).
It seems like a simple change from "the beginning of its last turn" to "the beginning of the caster's last turn," solves this particular paradox. Is there some other reason that particular wording was chosen?
I think the way it's worded it does happen to gain other benefits in albeit odd situations. Take this one,
Guard - hears noise from you moving on your turn invisibly, but can't see anything, has access to a See Invisibility spell (scroll, wand, is a spellcaster, whathaveyou) and casts it.
Mage - moves behind guard and casts Memory Lapse
Guard - probably wastes action casting See Invisibility again because he knows there's someone out there.
Yes, not a perfect example in any way, but there are always those moments when the enemy has to waste a turn doing something that they have already done but don't remember that might not be so effective anymore. Just sayin', for a first level spell it has some interesting potential in just the right situations. And if you're a talking skill based Bard, you might have it around anyway and it might just be a neat combat spell a few times.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the intent of the spell was to make the target forget the last thing the mage did or said. To give the mage a do-over if you will.
As worded, it makes the target forget the last thing it did.
It's a subtle but profound difference.
So, the utility of spell doesn't rest with how powerful the result is, but rather on game mechanics, do you have standard action remaining or not.
I posted one example where it didn't help in the least. You pointed to the counter example of where it worked as intended. The problem is that the difference in whether it works or not isn't the power of the spell. It's how the wording of the spell interacts with the game mechanics.
It both cases the mage was spotted, he then immediate cast memory lapse. In one case, the enemy forgets he saw him (the desired result) in the other case the enemy just forgets how he reacted (not so useful).
It seems like a simple change from "the beginning of its last turn" to "the beginning of the caster's last turn," solves this particular paradox. Is there some other reason that particular wording was chosen?
I looked back at my turnover and the wording is unchanged from that. Since I don't have a specific recollection of the design choices I had in mind in December 2009 when I sent in that spell, my best guess at this point is that I intended the spell to be used for:
1. Retry on Cha skills
2. Side effect of recheck on other opposed skill checks, like Perc/Stealth, though in most situations that would be more useful to cast on behalf of an ally, not yourself.
For that matter, I could have had in mind that the spell was *NOT* primarily to use for yourself, but for allies. In fact, if I had meant it to be used on yourself as its primary function, I probably would've given it a casting time of a swift or immediate action, which would have made its self-focused uses much more obvious.
So, perhaps it was always intended primarily as either a conversational or help-others spell. The potential use of it to help you re-hide when spotted is more of a side effect than the primary use.
Do you see some situation other than the re-hiding situation that would impede a caster for using this spell to their benefit?
In social situations this spell sort of doubles down when you've rolled bad, doesn't it?
E.g., you failed to persuade me, and now you're casting a spell on me -- if I make my save, we've gone from "I'm not convinced" to "You're attacking me!", especially given that the victim knows it made a save but possibly not what spell was cast.
In social situations this spell sort of doubles down when you've rolled bad, doesn't it?
E.g., you failed to persuade me, and now you're casting a spell on me -- if I make my save, we've gone from "I'm not convinced" to "You're attacking me!", especially given that the victim knows it made a save but possibly not what spell was cast.
Oh, Spellsong. I love you so much.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the intent of the spell was to make the target forget the last thing the mage did or said. To give the mage a do-over if you will.
As worded, it makes the target forget the last thing it did.
It's a subtle but profound difference.
So, the utility of spell doesn't rest with how powerful the result is, but rather on game mechanics, do you have standard action remaining or not.
I posted one example where it didn't help in the least. You pointed to the counter example of where it worked as intended. The problem is that the difference in whether it works or not isn't the power of the spell. It's how the wording of the spell interacts with the game mechanics.
It both cases the mage was spotted, he then immediate cast memory lapse. In one case, the enemy forgets he saw him (the desired result) in the other case the enemy just forgets how he reacted (not so useful).
It seems like a simple change from "the beginning of its last turn" to "the beginning of the caster's last turn," solves this particular paradox. Is there some other reason that particular wording was chosen?
This does seem a bit off to me. Hm.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
In social situations this spell sort of doubles down when you've rolled bad, doesn't it?
E.g., you failed to persuade me, and now you're casting a spell on me -- if I make my save, we've gone from "I'm not convinced" to "You're attacking me!", especially given that the victim knows it made a save but possibly not what spell was cast.
Back during the Beta days, I had some conversations with a few Paizo folks about redesigning a fair number of spells into what I called "skill spells" - basically, spells that gave you skill bonuses instead of flat-out auto-successes. In some cases (like knock) that is how things ended up.
One that didn't change was charm person, a spell I had suggested to change for that exact reason. It's intended to be a subtle spell, but if you have to cast it and essentially "attack" the target with it... that makes it a little tougher.
The skill spell version of charm person would instead have been a spell you cast on YOURSELF, giving you a bonus to Diplomacy checks (basically like the 1st Ed. friends spell that gave you a temporary CHA bonus).
Alas, too much departure from established rules, violated backwards compatibility, etc.
Anyway, in response to your comment: Yes, it is exactly like doubling down in a social situation. You just have to gauge your chance of success vs. the cost of failure. After all, it's a 1st level spell; we hardly want it to be an auto-success.
Oh, Spellsong. I love you so much.
Although, in that case, they don't know that you're responsible but they do know they just made a saving throw against something.
Which might still be a problem for you, or might not.
Oh, Spellsong. I love you so much.Although, in that case, they don't know that you're responsible but they do know they just made a saving throw against something.
Which might still be a problem for you, or might not.
That's when you bluff them. :P
At any rate, Spellsong opens doors previously closed to enchanters. It's not perfect, but it's pretty freaking cool.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Another possible use of Memory Lapse - use it on your party members to allow them to re-roll failed will saves.
Example:
Fighter smacks Evil Guy
Evil Guy casts fear. Fighter fails his save
Wizard casts Memory Lapse on the fighter and makes the fighter forget that he was ever afraid
It wouldn't grant a new save. Just the fact that they don't remember the event that triggered the effect doesn't negate the effect.
To use your example, the fighter is still afraid, he just doesn't remember which creature or what effect caused it.
It would work to cause a creature to forget a command given to it while charmed or dominated, if the command itself occurred within the last round.
Depending on the generosity of the GM, it might scramble up a suggestion or command spell, though in that case I'd probably rule that the magical compulsion still exists; the target simply forgets what the compulsion was. It would effectively negate a single-round command spell (which I think is entirely reasonable, for a 1st level spell to negate another 1st level spell), but in the case of a command/suggestion lasting longer than a round, the subject would still feel compelled to obey the next suggestion or command (within the limits of the original spell) that the caster used on him. The compulsion is to obey the caster of the spell, and the compulsion remains in force. Even if the person whose memory has lapsed has forgotten who the caster is, the compulsion spell itself hasn't "forgotten." It knows who cast it, even if the memory lapsed person doesn't.
|
In social situations this spell sort of doubles down when you've rolled bad, doesn't it?
E.g., you failed to persuade me, and now you're casting a spell on me -- if I make my save, we've gone from "I'm not convinced" to "You're attacking me!", especially given that the victim knows it made a save but possibly not what spell was cast.
This is a prime situation where a skill or feat that allows a spellcaster to disguise or hide spellcasting would be a great addition. It works well for Dark Sun. :)
|
|
Another possible use of Memory Lapse - use it on your party members to allow them to re-roll failed will saves.
Example:
Fighter smacks Evil Guy
Evil Guy casts fear. Fighter fails his save
Wizard casts Memory Lapse on the fighter and makes the fighter forget that he was ever afraid
I like this, however if this was the primary motivation for the design of this spell, perhaps it should be renamed to "Redo" or "Do Over" or "Take Two, Action!"
I really think this needs to be a weaker version of the 2nd Ed spell Forget, that covers the last minute or if you like 1d10 rounds (for that element of randomness).
Perhaps the version I suggested could be a 2nd level version?
The compulsion is to obey the caster of the spell, and the compulsion remains in force. Even if the person whose memory has lapsed has forgotten who the caster is, the compulsion spell itself hasn't "forgotten." It knows who cast it, even if the memory lapsed person doesn't.
Although, maybe it'd be valid to use Memory Lapse the other way around: you lapse the caster of the compulsion, and now he still COULD command the fighter through his domination spell, but he's forgotten that he can.
I agree that "to the beginning of its last turn" is not particularly useful because "the beginning of its last turn" will always be after the caster just FUBAR'd something so Memory Lapse fails to make the target forget anything except what the caster is ABOUT to do. But since it is a standard action, it's not even good for other spell based parlor tricks so basically you cast Memory Lapse then hope there is somewhere to run and hide within 30 feet.
Even "at the beginning of the previous round" doesn't fix it because it still assumes you are working in a defined order. What's the previous round when you get caught trying to sneak past guards? There is no previous round. Why not just say "The target forgets everything that happened in the last 6 seconds." That deals with both in combat and out of combat. Players can translate that - they have to do it for round/level abilities out of combat and minute/level spells in combat.
I'm considering a house rule that will allow the spell to work based on level. Subject forgets one round per levels of caster -- something like that. Any thoughts?
I really want to like this spell, but I'm having trouble with it. The subject, in many cases, has to know that a small jump of time has occurred. For instance, even if I (as the subject) revert back to what I was doing I should be able to potentially notice discrepancies. For example, if I was aware of kids playing in the street when the spell was cast then I'll surely have a chance to notice that the children are no longer in the same spot; rather that they have somehow 'jumped' location.