Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Petition: I nominate Ashiel to work for Paizo as Rules Consultant


Off-Topic Discussions

651 to 700 of 951 << first < prev | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | next > last >>

[tongue-in-cheek]Here's a thought, if the Caster isn't adjacent to the person he Charms, and doesn't have Reach, he can't threaten the creature at all.[/tongue-in-cheek]


Ashiel wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Talonhawke wrote:

@nicos The same way as a captured hobgoblin lieutenent can have just watched 4 people slaughter 15 of his comrades and tie him up then proceed to say some magic words and tell him its okay I'm your friend tell me what your boss is up to and he will.

(all of the above is in refernce to the 1st encounter in Red Hand of Doom which as Ashiel mentioned earlier is the books exact method of getting such info)

I mean, the wizard cast charm person at some point but he did not behave nice with the ghaele, the threat did not stop.

If you have hostilities present, the Ghaele gets a +5 bonus on their saving throw to resist the initial charm spell. The fact the ghaele was being threatened prior to being charmed does not automatically break the spell. Instead, if the caster attacked the ghaele after being charmed, then the spell would automatically break and need to be re-applied.

Charm Person wrote:
If the creature is currently being threatened or attacked by you or your allies, however, it receives a +5 bonus on its saving throw.

I Almost completly agree. Note however that the wizad do not need to attack to break the spell. The spell says

"Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed person breaks the spell"

I do not see how the behavior of the wizard can be considered less thatn a thread at any point of your short (and interesting) story.


Tels wrote:
[tongue-in-cheek]Here's a thought, if the Caster isn't adjacent to the person he Charms, and doesn't have Reach, he can't threaten the creature at all.[/tongue-in-cheek]

Funny thing is a lot of the problems we run into are symptomatic of this kind of blurring of the lines between common usage of language and technical game-term usage.

We could solve a lot of our headaches by just having game terms clearly defined and bolded or something (italics would be fine if we weren't already using them for spell names and magic items).

Magic the Gathering does a good job of separating fluff and crunch this way which probably is me factor in its huge popularity. Even 4e seemed to take some good steps in this direction from what I could tell.


Grimmy wrote:
Tels wrote:
[tongue-in-cheek]Here's a thought, if the Caster isn't adjacent to the person he Charms, and doesn't have Reach, he can't threaten the creature at all.[/tongue-in-cheek]

Funny thing is a lot of the problems we run into are symptomatic of this kind of blurring of the lines between common usage of language and technical game-term usage.

We could solve a lot of our headaches by just having game terms clearly defined and bolded or something (italics would be fine if we weren't already using them for spell names and magic items).

Magic the Gathering does a good job of separating fluff and crunch this way which probably is me factor in its huge popularity. Even 4e seemed to take some good steps in this direction from what I could tell.

I could swear there was a thread that made that point not too long ago...


Grimmy wrote:

Up, look whos back.

Wussup Ash

Not much buddy. Just posted in your thread by the way, and will be thinking of more ideas. ^-^

I had a group of undead living in a desert who raised giant scorpions as a type of cattle. The idea is that they sold their venom to be used as poisons, to create medicines, or to be used as materials for casting spells or creating magic items. The fact they were undead was merely due to the circumstances (but the immunity to testy stings would make the job easier, but it's not the first time sentient humanoids have kept dangerous animals commercially). They also used their poop as fertilizer. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is it just me, or is it every time certain posters got to sleep, work or w/e, we stop discussing rules and start discussing fun things? But the second they come back, it's right back to arguing over rules and interpretations.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Geas notes it can't be dispelled...and cites dispel magic.

Greater Restoration can alleviate and remove MANY conditions which cannot be dispelled (insanity?), and that includes ALL EFFECTS WHICH CAUSE ABILITY SCORE PENALTIES. Greater Restoration is demonstrably more powerful then Remove Curse and Remove Enchantment, both of which can dispel spells that can't be dispelled...with dispel magic.

There are two absolutes, and as I noted, in case of two absolutes, you differ first to spell level, and then to defensive second. Nowhere in the Geas spell language does it LIMIT removal to 'only these spells'. Kindly do no repeat that argument.

Greater Restoration wins outright all three counts. Geas is not the lock you think it is.

======
Again, Ashiel, you didn't read those summoning rules you posted. Nowhere does it say the other strictures on the Protection from Evil aren't still relevant. As I SPECIFICALLY SAID, they add other abilities...they don't remove the old ones.

Read them again, and tell me where it says otherwise.

===
(Aside) As for material components, who says the Ghaele doesn't have the diamond on it? It's been Called. Spellcasters are generally assumed to be carrying the comps needed for their spells.

===
Lower level defensive spells can sometimes overcome niches in which they are powerful for more powerful spells. Note that Greater Invisibility is a 2nd level spell effect that simply doesn't go away when you attack. I also believe it's been mentioned that a successful non-detection will trump See Invisibility...defensive spell trumping divination of the same level. I believe a Veil will also trump those anti-invisibilty spells, but I could be wrong here. I believe Illusionary Wall trumps True Seeing, which is a lower level spell, as would Mind Blank, etc.

==Aelryinth


Nicos wrote:
I do not see how the behavior of the wizard can be considered less thatn a thread at any point of your short (and interesting) story.

Mainly because if he could get the critter charmed, then he would seem a lot nicer once the charm took hold. "Oh, my dear, I will free you! Please, accept my previous offer, and I'll get you out of there". The wizard isn't actively threatening her. Heck, he might even be able to use Diplomacy to convince her to simply serve him without question while she's being magically duped. Or might default to a Charisma check to force her to accept.

Of course, that's assuming he's negated her protection from constant effect somehow. More than likely, in light of that, he'd probably just go the pure whips & chains amount and curse her half to death and take the risk of having her roll a -7 instead of -13. With the +6 to resist due to having a crappy deal, she'd be down to a +2 versus whatever he could muster. Of course, that's a lot better than the +9 that she would normally be rolling with.


Ashiel wrote:
Nicos wrote:
I do not see how the behavior of the wizard can be considered less thatn a thread at any point of your short (and interesting) story.

Mainly because if he could get the critter charmed, then he would seem a lot nicer once the charm took hold. "Oh, my dear, I will free you! Please, accept my previous offer, and I'll get you out of there". The wizard isn't actively threatening her. Heck, he might even be able to use Diplomacy to convince her to simply serve him without question while she's being magically duped. Or might default to a Charisma check to force her to accept.

I agree. But that did not happen in the story.

EDIT: Actually the only part disappointing in your story is the end, if the ghaele change to the dark side there should bemore drama in that , not just "I fail my roll" IMHO. Some moral dilemma could work for example.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Ashiel wrote:
Grimmy wrote:

Up, look whos back.

Wussup Ash

Not much buddy. Just posted in your thread by the way, and will be thinking of more ideas. ^-^

I had a group of undead living in a desert who raised giant scorpions as a type of cattle. The idea is that they sold their venom to be used as poisons, to create medicines, or to be used as materials for casting spells or creating magic items. The fact they were undead was merely due to the circumstances (but the immunity to testy stings would make the job easier, but it's not the first time sentient humanoids have kept dangerous animals commercially). They also used their poop as fertilizer. :P

Food. Giant Scorpions would be like eating VERY big shrimp, or crab.

Mmm, giant scorpion legs and claws and tails in hot butter. Delicacy for rich gourmands. And vermin, especially magical vermin, tend to grow very quickly and be able to eat just about anything.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:
(Aside) As for material components, who says the Ghaele doesn't have the diamond on it? It's been Called. Spellcasters are generally assumed to be carrying the comps needed for their spells.

Well, the stat-block doesn't have a spell-component pouch either. A caster with a spell-component pouch is generally assumed to have all it's components, but the Ghaele has none of this.

A character cannot just be 'assumed' to have 5,000 gp of Diamond Dust on them at all times, simply because they are a caster.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Grimmy wrote:

Alryinth,

Ashiel wrote:
Suffice to say that I did make a mistake. The ghaele is under a constant effect that mirrors protection from evil which specifically makes it immune to the charm effect, so the bad guy will need to do it the old fashioned way

I was thinking of this.

But if Ashiel does still think Geas would get through Protection from Evil, isn't that consistent with the precedent you set in your interpretation of Greater Restoration dispelling ability penalties from Geas, despite text in the spell description to the effect that this ability damage cannot be dispelled? i.e. why does higher spell level trump specific rules in one case but not the other?

I personally don't see it going that way in either case, for my games, for the time being, Protection from Evil will block Geas, and ability damage from Geas will only be recovered by the means called out in its description. These specific rules trump the general rules in the Magic chapter about spell level, which you referred to.

the difference is that Geas does not say 'cannot be suppressed by abjuration spells'. In which case, you now have two absolutes, and compare the language, level, and so forth.

Higher level wins. If equal level, defensive spell wins (magic missile vs shield, etc).

Greater Restoration works perfectly well on Geas. GR can dispel all sorts of spells that can't be dispelled...by Dispel Magic. Just like Remove Curse and Break Enchantment can. And is considerably more powerful then either.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

Geas notes it can't be dispelled...and cites dispel magic.

Greater Restoration can alleviate and remove MANY conditions which cannot be dispelled (insanity?), and that includes ALL EFFECTS WHICH CAUSE ABILITY SCORE PENALTIES. Greater Restoration is demonstrably more powerful then Remove Curse and Remove Enchantment, both of which can dispel spells that can't be dispelled...with dispel magic.

Insanity wrote:

The affected creature suffers from a continuous confusion effect, as the spell.

Remove curse does not remove insanity. Greater restoration, heal, limited wish, miracle, or wish can restore the creature.

Can't be dispelled is can't be dispelled.

Quote:

======

Again, Ashiel, you didn't read those summoning rules you posted. Nowhere does it say the other strictures on the Protection from Evil aren't still relevant. As I SPECIFICALLY SAID, they add other abilities...they don't remove the old ones.

Read them again, and tell me where it says otherwise.

You didn't read them. There's a separate alternative thing involved here, and one that has nothing to do with summoned creatures. You're drawing connections that do not exist.

Quote:

===

(Aside) As for material components, who says the Ghaele doesn't have the diamond on it? It's been Called. Spellcasters are generally assumed to be carrying the comps needed for their spells.===

Your average ghaele has a sword that costs 32,000 gp, out of 34,800 gp. The Ghaele cannot afford the material component that costs 5,000 gp; which might be a big influence on why that spell isn't prepared. However, at this point, it seems like we're getting into GM vs binder, more than we're getting into reasoning.

Quote:

Lower level defensive spells can sometimes overcome niches in which they are powerful for more powerful spells. Note that Greater Invisibility is a 2nd level spell effect that simply doesn't go away when you attack. I also believe it's been mentioned that a successful non-detection will trump See Invisibility...defensive spell trumping divination of the same level. I believe a Veil will also trump those anti-invisibilty spells, but I could be wrong here. I believe Illusionary Wall trumps True Seeing, which is a lower level spell, as would Mind Blank, etc.

==Aelryinth

Generally, spells say what they overcome. When a spell says "cannot be dispelled", then another spell that says "dispels" cannot dispel it unless it says "It dispels *that spell that can't normally be dispelled*". Not difficult.

I'm curious. Why are we fighting about this exactly? What possessed you to dive in and begin making this mess of the rules, and argue this both with equal parts fervor and disrespect? I'm legitimately curious, because it's obviously not do to some need to correct me on the rules, since your argument doesn't really rely on the rules at all.


Supastah!!

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Tels wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
(Aside) As for material components, who says the Ghaele doesn't have the diamond on it? It's been Called. Spellcasters are generally assumed to be carrying the comps needed for their spells.

Well, the stat-block doesn't have a spell-component pouch either. A caster with a spell-component pouch is generally assumed to have all it's components, but the Ghaele has none of this.

A character cannot just be 'assumed' to have 5,000 gp of Diamond Dust on them at all times, simply because they are a caster.

So if a NPC cleric doesn't have 'holy symbol' listed in his spell block, he's got no symbol and can't cast spells at all?

Sorry, man, that's default equipment for any spellcaster. Don't go there. that's like saying the 6 hp peasant farmer you met on the road is nude because the DM didn't put 'clothes' into his stat block, and can't hoe his fields because a key tool of his occupation wasn't mentioned.

:)

==Aelryinth


Ashiel wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
--post--

I hate to ask this, but could you try formatting your posts differently from here on out Aelryinth? It's really messing with my eyes trying to follow it. Everything just seems so scattered, and there are paragraph spaces between most every sentence. It makes it rather difficult to follow, let alone respond.

1.) Geas specifically says it cannot be dispelled, but may be removed by the the listed spells. Geas specifically notes that it cannot be dispelled. Greater restoration cannot end it.

That is not what it says. It says you can't use dispel magic. Compare to bestow curse which says "The curse bestowed by this spell cannot be dispelled." It does not block off certain spells, but dispelling as a whole.

Neither version of geas say dispelling does not work across the board.

Honestly though I think Greater Restoration was overlooked. Otherwise it would have been mentioned as a yes or no. It is a high level spell so I can guess that it would have been allowed. The closest thing to support it is the denial of dispel magic, but those spells don't even do the same thing so I can't really count it.


Now I do agree with Ashiel that PoE does not affect(put up a barrier against) called creatures the way it affects summoned ones because summoning and calling spells are two different subschools of magic.


Nicos wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Nicos wrote:
I do not see how the behavior of the wizard can be considered less thatn a thread at any point of your short (and interesting) story.

Mainly because if he could get the critter charmed, then he would seem a lot nicer once the charm took hold. "Oh, my dear, I will free you! Please, accept my previous offer, and I'll get you out of there". The wizard isn't actively threatening her. Heck, he might even be able to use Diplomacy to convince her to simply serve him without question while she's being magically duped. Or might default to a Charisma check to force her to accept.

I agree. But that did not happen in the story.

EDIT: Actually the only part disappointing in your story is the end, if the ghaele change to the dark side there should bemore drama in that , not just "I fail my roll" IMHO. Some moral dilemma could work for example.

Hmm, by chance did you see some of the stuff that followed that story Nicos? The ghaele doesn't actually fall to the darkside. She's still Chaotic Good with aligned subtypes and everything. She's just basically on a leash that she didn't want but eventually submitted to. I actually noted that she would be trying to figure out a way out of it, and hate him the entire time. I mentioned this as being a perfect opportunity for her to encounter the adventuring party during a task she is forced to preform, and try to have them sabotage the big bad. Even if said sabotage is kidnapping the Ghaele from the big bad, so that his duration on his open-ended task runs out and the ghaele becomes free to exact her retribution.

If given the opportunity, she would naturally spare the lives of anyone that she could. If ordered to destroy a city, then she would do so with the least loss of life possible. If she was told to capture the daughter of a duke, then she would do so without hurting her. The bad guy is yanking the chain of an unwilling creature. Given the chance, she will turn to bite him. But that's what makes the bad guy an egotistical bastard. He feels invincible enough that she cannot escape him, and probably plans to kill her before her service is complete.

Hence how the party might end up fighting a good-aligned Ghaele without it being fallen, and even have an opportunity to rescue her, and earn a powerful ally. Sure, during the story the ghaele may die against the PCs (if they cannot subdue her without killing her), or may be killed by the big bad, but she may also be rescued, his spells broken, hidden away until the spell breaks, or they banish her back to the heavenly realms (probably the happiest banishment of her life).

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Quote Ashiel "I'm curious. Why are we fighting about this exactly? What possessed you to dive in and begin making this mess of the rules, and argue this both with equal parts fervor and disrespect? I'm legitimately curious, because it's obviously not do to some need to correct me on the rules, since your argument doesn't really rely on the rules at all."

=========
This kind of stuff. You completely dismiss any argument you don't like, and then belittle the person who posts something that contradicts you...despite the rules saying otherwise.

That's passive aggressive, and then you call out the other person for disagreeing with you, and you're perfectly right, and they are wrong, and you try to make them look bad. You've done it repeatedly.

There is no 'limited to these spells' language in Geas. Point it out, and I'll bow and admit you are right. You can't.

"All magical effects which cause ability score penalties" is universal. Tell me that Geas does not cause Ability Score penalties, and I'll bow and admit you are correct. You can't.

I already pointed out that if the person is obeying the Geas and NOT UNDER A PENALTY, then Greater Restoration doesn't work. Which is the only corner case where your interpretation is correct. Which means the only time Greater Restoration will work is on someone who is being restrained from obeying their Geas. Like, by being trapped inside a binding circle.

Greater Restoration can dispel all sorts of other spells and conditions which cannot be dispelled. Geas is not unique. Quit pretending it is. Curses can't be dispelled. Insanity can't be. A Geas is just another condition.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:
Tels wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
(Aside) As for material components, who says the Ghaele doesn't have the diamond on it? It's been Called. Spellcasters are generally assumed to be carrying the comps needed for their spells.

Well, the stat-block doesn't have a spell-component pouch either. A caster with a spell-component pouch is generally assumed to have all it's components, but the Ghaele has none of this.

A character cannot just be 'assumed' to have 5,000 gp of Diamond Dust on them at all times, simply because they are a caster.

So if a NPC cleric doesn't have 'holy symbol' listed in his spell block, he's got no symbol and can't cast spells at all?

Sorry, man, that's default equipment for any spellcaster. Don't go there. that's like saying the 6 hp peasant farmer you met on the road is nude because the DM didn't put 'clothes' into his stat block, and can't hoe his fields because a key tool of his occupation wasn't mentioned.

:)

==Aelryinth

I would actually say yes, and have done so in games I've run. The player of a Cleric forgot to purchase a Holy Symbol to cast a spell, and I told him he couldn't cast a spell because of it.

All characters have a free set of clothing as long as it's under a certain gp amount, which I think is 10.

When I create PCs, NPCs, or Monsters, I make sure they have everything they legitimately need to be a living, breathing creature in the world.

Technically speaking, the Ghaele can't cast spells at all because it has no Holy Symbol.


I just took a look and Geas does mention that it is not affected by Dispel Magic, the specific spell. It doesn't say that the ability penalties can not be dispelled by any means. I thought I had read that somewhere but I guess I was wrong. Just wanted to concede that point.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

wraithstrike wrote:
Now I do agree with Ashiel that PoE does not affect(put up a barrier against) called creatures the way it affects summoned ones because summoning and calling spells are two different subschools of magic.

If you attack the Warded creature...

The spell makes no differentiation between Called and Summoned. It uses 'warded creature'.

And inside a Summoning circle, that includes Called beings.

Now, try to explain that somehow a bound Called being is not being warded against. That will be a hoot of an argument. If you attack the warded being, it can attack back and the protection is broken.

==Aelryinth


wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
--post--

I hate to ask this, but could you try formatting your posts differently from here on out Aelryinth? It's really messing with my eyes trying to follow it. Everything just seems so scattered, and there are paragraph spaces between most every sentence. It makes it rather difficult to follow, let alone respond.

1.) Geas specifically says it cannot be dispelled, but may be removed by the the listed spells. Geas specifically notes that it cannot be dispelled. Greater restoration cannot end it.

That is not what it says. It says you can't use dispel magic. Compare to bestow curse which says "The curse bestowed by this spell cannot be dispelled." It does not block off certain spells, but dispelling as a whole.

Neither version of geas say dispelling does not work across the board.

Honestly though I think Greater Restoration was overlooked. Otherwise it would have been mentioned as a yes or no. It is a high level spell so I can guess that it would have been allowed. The closest thing to support it is the denial of dispel magic, but those spells don't even do the same thing so I can't really count it.

It doesn't have to. It specifically lists what sorts of effects will remove geas. Greater restoration is not on that list. But I'll accept that it could be contested. So I guess now we just need the ghaele to pull a 5,000 gp diamond out of her butt and rest undisturbed for some time to re-prepare her spells.


Ashiel wrote:
Nicos wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Nicos wrote:
I do not see how the behavior of the wizard can be considered less thatn a thread at any point of your short (and interesting) story.

Mainly because if he could get the critter charmed, then he would seem a lot nicer once the charm took hold. "Oh, my dear, I will free you! Please, accept my previous offer, and I'll get you out of there". The wizard isn't actively threatening her. Heck, he might even be able to use Diplomacy to convince her to simply serve him without question while she's being magically duped. Or might default to a Charisma check to force her to accept.

I agree. But that did not happen in the story.

EDIT: Actually the only part disappointing in your story is the end, if the ghaele change to the dark side there should bemore drama in that , not just "I fail my roll" IMHO. Some moral dilemma could work for example.

Hmm, by chance did you see some of the stuff that followed that story Nicos? The ghaele doesn't actually fall to the darkside. She's still Chaotic Good with aligned subtypes and everything. She's just basically on a leash that she didn't want but eventually submitted to. I actually noted that she would be trying to figure out a way out of it, and hate him the entire time. I mentioned this as being a perfect opportunity for her to encounter the adventuring party during a task she is forced to preform, and try to have them sabotage the big bad. Even if said sabotage is kidnapping the Ghaele from the big bad, so that his duration on his open-ended task runs out and the ghaele becomes free to exact her retribution.

If given the opportunity, she would naturally spare the lives of anyone that she could. If ordered to destroy a city, then she would do so with the least loss of life possible. If she was told to capture the daughter of a duke, then she would do so without hurting her. The bad guy is yanking the chain of an unwilling creature. Given the chance, she will turn to bite him. But that's what makes...

sorry i dit nor read that.

Now, This is interesting, but i have a few question though.

Is the ghaele chared ath this point, i mean at this point "I actually noted that she would be trying to figure out a way out of it, and hate him the entire time."

What stop the ghaele to just kill the wizard?


I would say the ghaele would be assumed to have all components of insignificant material cost by default, and might have any costly components at GM discretion if that's the way the treasure budget was to be spent.


Tels wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Tels wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
(Aside) As for material components, who says the Ghaele doesn't have the diamond on it? It's been Called. Spellcasters are generally assumed to be carrying the comps needed for their spells.

Well, the stat-block doesn't have a spell-component pouch either. A caster with a spell-component pouch is generally assumed to have all it's components, but the Ghaele has none of this.

A character cannot just be 'assumed' to have 5,000 gp of Diamond Dust on them at all times, simply because they are a caster.

So if a NPC cleric doesn't have 'holy symbol' listed in his spell block, he's got no symbol and can't cast spells at all?

Sorry, man, that's default equipment for any spellcaster. Don't go there. that's like saying the 6 hp peasant farmer you met on the road is nude because the DM didn't put 'clothes' into his stat block, and can't hoe his fields because a key tool of his occupation wasn't mentioned.

:)

==Aelryinth

I would actually say yes, and have done so in games I've run. The player of a Cleric forgot to purchase a Holy Symbol to cast a spell, and I told him he couldn't cast a spell because of it.

All characters have a free set of clothing as long as it's under a certain gp amount, which I think is 10.

When I create PCs, NPCs, or Monsters, I make sure they have everything they legitimately need to be a living, breathing creature in the world.

Technically speaking, the Ghaele can't cast spells at all because it has no Holy Symbol.

I'll be the first to say that I think it's fair to spend the Ghaele's remaining treasure to determine what other gear she has. She has a few thousand gold, but not enough to be carrying a 5,000 gp diamond. It seems reasonable that she may be wearing a holy symbol or fifty, some jewelry, and maybe a cheap magic trinket even.

But really, this just seems like arguing for arguing's sake at this point. >.>

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Grimmy wrote:
I just took a look and Geas does mention that it is not affected by Dispel Magic, the specific spell. It doesn't say that the ability penalties can not be dispelled by any means. I thought I had read that somewhere but I guess I was wrong. Just wanted to concede that point.

Thank you. YOu've been very even-handed.

As Ciretose noted, Ashiel gets very creative with the rules, but that doesn't make them core rules. Quite literally, his story above cannot happen without rewriting the core rules. That's spreading disinformation, and that's why I jumped in. I didn't want people thinking they could have their evil wizards get willy-nilly away with Calling up and enslaving/sacrificing angels without noting that it's going to take some bending of the rules to make it happen, and straight DM fiat on how things work different in their own campaign. I also pointed out the logical result of the rules working the way Ashiel presents them - spellcasters calling up any outsiders that work against them, and slaughtering them helplessly while they can't fight back.

It's a creative story, it's a mean story, it's a wicked story. But it's not going to happen in this game as Ashiel wrote it.

==Aelryinth


Ashiel wrote:
Greater restoration is not on that list. But I'll accept that it could be contested.

See this Aelryiel? This is what I haven't seen you do once. Concede anything, value anyone else's input enough to consider learning from it, or entertain for a moment that you might be fallible. This is a mark of maturity in my eyes that Ashiel and many others in this thread can do this. It fosters a good environment, and healthy discussion. Your seeming inability to do this contributes to my impression that you have a very inflated opinion of yourself.

Edit: Ninja'd

Sorry if this post seems harsh in light of what you've written above.


Nicos wrote:

sorry i dit nor read that.

Now, This is interesting, but i have a few question though.

Is the ghaele chared ath this point, i mean at this point "I actually noted that she would be trying to figure out a way out of it, and hate him the entire time."

What stop the ghaele to just kill the wizard?

Well, in the example the BBEG gave her an open-ended order to serve him loyally and do her best to see his will made manifest, and that sort of thing. Essentially, he has her by the throat due to their contract. She "agreed" to the contract (the binding doesn't actually care that it wasn't exactly fair). So she has to do what he says for a few weeks at least. That will more or less mean she can't kill him herself.

Sending a message to a Paladin or a goodly adventuring party, on the other hand, would be A-OK though. :)


Ashiel wrote:
Tels wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
Tels wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
(Aside) As for material components, who says the Ghaele doesn't have the diamond on it? It's been Called. Spellcasters are generally assumed to be carrying the comps needed for their spells.

Well, the stat-block doesn't have a spell-component pouch either. A caster with a spell-component pouch is generally assumed to have all it's components, but the Ghaele has none of this.

A character cannot just be 'assumed' to have 5,000 gp of Diamond Dust on them at all times, simply because they are a caster.

So if a NPC cleric doesn't have 'holy symbol' listed in his spell block, he's got no symbol and can't cast spells at all?

Sorry, man, that's default equipment for any spellcaster. Don't go there. that's like saying the 6 hp peasant farmer you met on the road is nude because the DM didn't put 'clothes' into his stat block, and can't hoe his fields because a key tool of his occupation wasn't mentioned.

:)

==Aelryinth

I would actually say yes, and have done so in games I've run. The player of a Cleric forgot to purchase a Holy Symbol to cast a spell, and I told him he couldn't cast a spell because of it.

All characters have a free set of clothing as long as it's under a certain gp amount, which I think is 10.

When I create PCs, NPCs, or Monsters, I make sure they have everything they legitimately need to be a living, breathing creature in the world.

Technically speaking, the Ghaele can't cast spells at all because it has no Holy Symbol.

I'll be the first to say that I think it's fair to spend the Ghaele's remaining treasure to determine what other gear she has. She has a few thousand gold, but not enough to be carrying a 5,000 gp diamond. It seems reasonable that she may be wearing a holy symbol or fifty, some jewelry, and maybe a cheap magic trinket even.

But really, this just seems like arguing for arguing's sake at this point. >.>

I agree, it's completely reasonable for the Ghaele to spend her remaining wealth on stuff. But Aelryinth was trying to hand-waive the material cost of Greater Restoration.

After I pointed out the Cleric didn't have a Holy Symbol, I then allowed the Cleric to carve one to use until she could replace it in town. She used that Holy Symbol for awhile, and grew attached to it, to the point she didn't want another one, she wanted to keep the one she made for her Goddess.

I thought it was an awesome role-play myself.


@Aelryiel: Ok that's fair.

I just feel somewhat responsible for the s$&!t storm happening in this thread I started. I intended it to be a pleasant nod to a poster whose ideas have influenced me. I've been amazed at the hostility some people feel towards Ashiel.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Ashiel wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
--post--

I hate to ask this, but could you try formatting your posts differently from here on out Aelryinth? It's really messing with my eyes trying to follow it. Everything just seems so scattered, and there are paragraph spaces between most every sentence. It makes it rather difficult to follow, let alone respond.

1.) Geas specifically says it cannot be dispelled, but may be removed by the the listed spells. Geas specifically notes that it cannot be dispelled. Greater restoration cannot end it.

That is not what it says. It says you can't use dispel magic. Compare to bestow curse which says "The curse bestowed by this spell cannot be dispelled." It does not block off certain spells, but dispelling as a whole.

Neither version of geas say dispelling does not work across the board.

Honestly though I think Greater Restoration was overlooked. Otherwise it would have been mentioned as a yes or no. It is a high level spell so I can guess that it would have been allowed. The closest thing to support it is the denial of dispel magic, but those spells don't even do the same thing so I can't really count it.

It doesn't have to. It specifically lists what sorts of effects will remove geas. Greater restoration is not on that list. But I'll accept that it could be contested. So I guess now we just need the ghaele to pull a 5,000 gp diamond out of her butt and rest undisturbed for some time to re-prepare her spells.

Since there is no 'limited to these spells' or 'these spells only' language in Geas, I'd say you have no choice in the matter.

As for their spellcasting, I'd personally handwave it the same way I handwave Efreeti not having to pay 25k gp for a wish.

Note also, a Ghaele is NOT a 13th level cleric. He just has divine spells like one (and no domains). Material components probably aren't even neccessary...wasn't there a dev posting on this?

Personally, I'd just have the Ghaele memorize Commune, speak with her superiors, and have them send her the correct component via Limited Wish or something. If not give them the exact location for a CG Planetar to come in...

Also, a 5k gp diamond could very easily be part of the ornamentation on her sword (which could also be a holy symbol). 16k in comps for the sword could easily include a doorstopper of a diamond.

==Aelryinth


Tels wrote:

I agree, it's completely reasonable for the Ghaele to spend her remaining wealth on stuff. But Aelryinth was trying to hand-waive the material cost of Greater Restoration.

After I pointed out the Cleric didn't have a Holy Symbol, I then allowed the Cleric to carve one to use until she could replace it in town. She used that Holy Symbol for awhile, and grew attached to it, to the point she didn't want another one, she wanted to keep the one she made for her Goddess.

I thought it was an awesome role-play myself.

Agreed. That's awesome. I think the handcrafted holy symbol is a cool idea too (and not difficult to do, as I'm sure your average person could take 10 and carve a spiritual symbol). Kudos. :D

Also, it's good to see that I'm not the only one who would list the expensive material components such as special eye drops (true seeing) and diamonds (limited wish) on my NPCs. ^-^


Aelryinth wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Now I do agree with Ashiel that PoE does not affect(put up a barrier against) called creatures the way it affects summoned ones because summoning and calling spells are two different subschools of magic.

If you attack the Warded creature...

The spell makes no differentiation between Called and Summoned. It uses 'warded creature'.

And inside a Summoning circle, that includes Called beings.

Now, try to explain that somehow a bound Called being is not being warded against. That will be a hoot of an argument. If you attack the warded being, it can attack back and the protection is broken.

==Aelryinth

I am confused. Which spell are we discussing? I thought it was PoE.

<goes reading>

Ok, I think I see what you are saying.

Quote:


This spell has an alternative version that you may choose when casting it. A magic circle against evil can be focused inward rather than outward. When focused inward, the spell binds a nongood called creature (such as those called by the lesser planar binding, planar binding, and greater planar binding spells) for a maximum of 24 hours per caster level, provided that you cast the spell that calls the creature within 1 round of casting the magic circle. The creature cannot cross the circle's boundaries. If a creature too large to fit into the spell's area is the subject of the spell, the spell acts as a normal protection from evil spell for that creature only.

I see what you are saying, but I don't think it works like that. I don't think allows the creature to be treated as a summoned one.

Quote:

A magic circle leaves much to be desired as a trap. If the circle of powdered silver laid down in the process of spellcasting is broken, the effect immediately ends. The trapped creature can do nothing that disturbs the circle, directly or indirectly, but other creatures can. If the called creature has spell resistance, it can test the trap once a day. If you fail to overcome its spell resistance, the creature breaks free, destroying the circle. A creature capable of any form of dimensional travel (astral projection, blink, dimension door, etherealness, gate, plane shift, shadow walk, teleport, and similar abilities) can simply leave the circle through such means. You can prevent the creature's extradimensional escape by casting a dimensional anchor spell on it, but you must cast the spell before the creature acts. If you are successful, the anchor effect lasts as long as the magic circle does. The creature cannot reach across the magic circle, but its ranged attacks (ranged weapons, spells, magical abilities, and the like) can. The creature can attack any target it can reach with its ranged attacks except for the circle itself.

This part is staying that the magic circle alone does not prevent the creature from attacking you.

Quote:


You can add a special diagram (a two-dimensional bounded figure with no gaps along its circumference, augmented with various magical sigils) to make the magic circle more secure. Drawing the diagram by hand takes 10 minutes and requires a DC 20 Spellcraft check. You do not know the result of this check. If the check fails, the diagram is ineffective. You can take 10 when drawing the diagram if you are under no particular time pressure to complete the task. This task also takes 10 full minutes. If time is no factor at all, and you devote 3 hours and 20 minutes to the task, you can take 20.

A successful diagram allows you to cast a dimensional anchor spell on the magic circle during the round before casting any summoning spell. The anchor holds any called creatures in the magic circle for 24 hours per caster level. A creature cannot use its spell resistance against a magic circle prepared with a diagram, and none of its abilities or attacks can cross the diagram. If the creature tries a Charisma check to break free of the trap (see the lesser planar binding spell), the DC increases by 5. The creature is immediately released if anything disturbs the diagram—even a straw laid across it. The creature itself cannot disturb the diagram either directly or indirectly, as noted above.

It is clear that the combination of both spells is meant to keep the creature from attacking, but nothing says the creature can't attack you anyway. The spells only stop it from fleeing.

The circle still seems to be fragile though. It seems that the literal diagram has to interrupted before the creature can attack from the other side. Breaking the plane above the circle does not seem to matter.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The efreeti is using a Spell like ability unlike the Azata. Spell like abilities have no componets so its not handwaving its RAW that he doesn't pay 25k.


Ashiel wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
--post--

I hate to ask this, but could you try formatting your posts differently from here on out Aelryinth? It's really messing with my eyes trying to follow it. Everything just seems so scattered, and there are paragraph spaces between most every sentence. It makes it rather difficult to follow, let alone respond.

1.) Geas specifically says it cannot be dispelled, but may be removed by the the listed spells. Geas specifically notes that it cannot be dispelled. Greater restoration cannot end it.

That is not what it says. It says you can't use dispel magic. Compare to bestow curse which says "The curse bestowed by this spell cannot be dispelled." It does not block off certain spells, but dispelling as a whole.

Neither version of geas say dispelling does not work across the board.

Honestly though I think Greater Restoration was overlooked. Otherwise it would have been mentioned as a yes or no. It is a high level spell so I can guess that it would have been allowed. The closest thing to support it is the denial of dispel magic, but those spells don't even do the same thing so I can't really count it.

It doesn't have to. It specifically lists what sorts of effects will remove geas. Greater restoration is not on that list. But I'll accept that it could be contested. So I guess now we just need the ghaele to pull a 5,000 gp diamond out of her butt and rest undisturbed for some time to re-prepare her spells.

I think the Ghaele is out of luck in that regard. She has no money left for that diamond.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:

Since there is no 'limited to these spells' or 'these spells only' language in Geas, I'd say you have no choice in the matter.

As for their spellcasting, I'd personally handwave it the same way I handwave Efreeti not having to pay 25k gp for a wish.

Note also, a Ghaele is NOT a 13th level cleric. He just has divine spells like one (and no domains). Material components probably aren't even neccessary...wasn't there a dev posting on this?...

I'm going to jump in and stop you right there. The Efreeti is casting wish through an SLA, which eschews all normal casting materials, as they are clearly NOT casting a spell, only manifesting an ability similar to a spell. The Ghaele is literally casting a spell, prepared as usual and manifested as such.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Grimmy wrote:

@Aelryiel: Ok that's fair.

I just feel somewhat responsible for the s$&!t storm happening in this thread I started. I intended it to be a pleasant nod to a poster whose ideas have influenced me. I've been amazed at the hostility some people feel towards Ashiel.

To be honest, much of Ashiel's advice is stuff that's been known about the game for years and years. Heck, I might have been the one to point out the Heightened Continual Light vs Darkness over TEN YEARS AGO on the WoTC boards. I used the trick in making up a 'magic flashlight' while I was still posting on Monte Cook's boards, of all things. It was one of the great reasons for a Sorceror to take Heighten SPell...or a Cleric.

So, the kowtowing to old tricks can be irksome to see.

Now, putting it all in one place was a good use of time, and I didn't mind seeing that. PUlling in all the different tricks into one place is akin to Tempest Stormwind's Optimization Showcase on the WotC boards...a great service to people who don't want to live on the boards looking for that kind of stuff.

A lot of it is also very creative exploitation of the rules, and ignoring a lot of the fluff and balance, i.e. stuff the DM should stay away from, and the players, too. Other stuff is pretty hard-core, intelligent you-better-be-careful stuff that a grognard like me can really appreciate.

So, there's a ton of stuff I don't mind, but flagrant disregard for the rules like that story? Sorry, that just gets my goat. It goes against all the fluff I can think of, AND it violates the rules.

Meh. Off to bed!

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

Since there is no 'limited to these spells' or 'these spells only' language in Geas, I'd say you have no choice in the matter.

As for their spellcasting, I'd personally handwave it the same way I handwave Efreeti not having to pay 25k gp for a wish.

Efreeti don't have to pay 25,000 gp for a wish because they cast it as a spell-like ability.

Quote:
Note also, a Ghaele is NOT a 13th level cleric. He just has divine spells like one (and no domains). Material components probably aren't even neccessary...wasn't there a dev posting on this?

If they cast spells as a cleric, they cast spells like a cleric. Components, preparation, the works.

Quote:
Personally, I'd just have the Ghaele memorize Commune, speak with her superiors, and have them send her the correct component via Limited Wish or something. If not give them the exact location for a CG Planetar to come in...

Ghaeles are the highest ranking of the Azata. I imagine that she could call for help, but getting someone to come directly to the BBEG's place from another plane of existance when none of them are assured to have plane shift or a way to get there? Perhaps. Maybe the ghaele can get someone to come save her herself, assuming the big bad lets her have enough peace to prepare her spells. Alternatively, she might get one of her Lillend Azata friends to use use a scroll of dream to find a group of heroes on the world the Ghaele is trapped upon to free her; since the Azata themselves may very well lack the power to get there and deal with the big bad and his facilities.

Of course, these are mostly ideas drawn from the descriptions of Azatas, their homeworld, and their ability to work together and such. It's kind of an interesting read.

Quote:

Also, a 5k gp diamond could very easily be part of the ornamentation on her sword (which could also be a holy symbol). 16k in comps for the sword could easily include a doorstopper of a diamond.

==Aelryinth

It would still be a +4 sword + 5000 gp diamond attached to it, which is still beyond her treasure value.


wraithstrike wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
It doesn't have to. It specifically lists what sorts of effects will remove geas. Greater restoration is not on that list. But I'll accept that it could be contested. So I guess now we just need the ghaele to pull a 5,000 gp diamond out of her butt and rest undisturbed for some time to re-prepare her spells.
I think the Ghaele is out of luck in that regard. She has no money left for that diamond.

That was my point, actually. :P

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Wraithstrike, look at everything there.

Now, anywhere there, does it state that the summoner/caster/binder can cast spells freely on the bound creature?

There is NOTHING in what you posted, or I read elsewhere, that explicitly permits this.

Because casting a spell on the creature breaks the magic of the Prot/Evil, and the warded creature is free to leave it.

If you can find some language that a caster can do anything it likes to a Bound creature, as long as it doesn't physically disturb the circle, I'd like to see it. Because somehow that is what Ashiel believes.

Okay, really off to bed.

==Aelryinth


@ashiel: Yup, several of us have said that in this flurry of posts I'm not sure who called it out first, maybe wraith when he noted that the ghaele has enough treasure budget for the components for the spells she does have prepared.


Oohhh kay, I'm spent...


Aelryinth wrote:
To be honest, much of Ashiel's advice is stuff that's been known about the game for years and years. Heck, I might have been the one to point out the Heightened Continual Light vs Darkness over TEN YEARS AGO on the WoTC boards. I used the trick in making up a 'magic flashlight' while I was still posting on Monte Cook's boards, of all things. It was one of the great reasons for a Sorceror to take Heighten SPell...or a Cleric.

Maybe you did. I imagine that out of the thousands of people who play 3.x/PF, that it would be fair to assume many of them realized that [Light] and [Darkness] spells overpowered one another based on level, since it actually says so in the rules, and realized the Heighten raises the level of a spell. I'm pretty sure I've never claimed anyone else never found something I've suggested. It seems silly to me to even worry about such things.

Quote:

A lot of it is also very creative exploitation of the rules, and ignoring a lot of the fluff and balance, i.e. stuff the DM should stay away from, and the players, too. Other stuff is pretty hard-core, intelligent you-better-be-careful stuff that a grognard like me can really appreciate.

So, there's a ton of stuff I don't mind, but flagrant disregard for the rules like that story? Sorry, that just gets my goat. It goes against all the fluff I can think of, AND it violates the rules.

Meh. Off to bed!

==Aelryinth

The thing is, you haven't actually shown how it's breaking the rules exactly. Everything you've said is either 100% assertion on your own, where you yourself have made mistakes in the rules, assertions that you refuse to show rules for (like the assertion that an evil wizard cannot cast a spell with the [Good] descriptor), broke the rules concerning both the ghaele's spells and equipment, and so forth. To top it all off, you've insulted me, acted in a manner that is very unbecoming, and have done little to nothing to add to the conversation while making yourself look less informed than you did to begin with.

And still you try to spite me...it's kind of hurtful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That was at least an APL +2 encounter.


Grimmy wrote:
That was at least an APL +2 encounter.

Eh? :P

EDIT: What was an APL +2 encounter? O.o


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That battle with the RPG Supastah. Who the hell summoned that thing into my thread?


Grimmy wrote:

That battle with the RPG Supastah. Who the hell summoned that thing into my thread?

Ooooh. Heh, I see. ^.^"


Ashiel wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
To be honest, much of Ashiel's advice is stuff that's been known about the game for years and years. Heck, I might have been the one to point out the Heightened Continual Light vs Darkness over TEN YEARS AGO on the WoTC boards. I used the trick in making up a 'magic flashlight' while I was still posting on Monte Cook's boards, of all things. It was one of the great reasons for a Sorceror to take Heighten SPell...or a Cleric.
Maybe you did. I imagine that out of the thousands of people who play 3.x/PF, that it would be fair to assume many of them realized that [Light] and [Darkness] spells overpowered one another based on level, since it actually says so in the rules, and realized the Heighten raises the level of a spell. I'm pretty sure I've never claimed anyone else never found something I've suggested. It seems silly to me to even worry about such things.

I myself can attest to this. I made that same observation before Ashiel posted his guide. However, I was thinking more along the lines of Heightening Daylight, while Ashiel bumped it to the next level by Heightening Continual Flame, thereby getting a permanent light spell, without having to create a magic item.


Ashiel wrote:
Grimmy wrote:

That battle with the RPG Supastah. Who the hell summoned that thing into my thread?

Ooooh. Heh, I see. ^.^"

Y'know, I had actually thought about it and realized what was my favorite encounter I've ran ever. Like the #1 favorite. I was going to post it, but then we got into all this planar binding / charm stuff, and another 50+ pages of rule quotes and such. >.>

I <3 the rules, I really do, but I was really enjoying talking plots, story ideas, and encounters and stuff. :(

I'll begin work on writing up my favorite encounter...

651 to 700 of 951 << first < prev | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Off-Topic Discussions / Petition: I nominate Ashiel to work for Paizo as Rules Consultant All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.