Without taking sides in the CoP spat, I'm going to state the obvious: Spells like this are subject to a lot of GM discretion - so noone is ever going to win this argument.
As others have suggested, FAQ it and move on if it bothers you that much and you really want to know the design team's intent.
If you insist on continuing to try and "win" it, you've probably failed the Int check. :) Your Charisma is definitely dropping, in any event.
But Brian, someone is WRONG on the internet.
Liquid, I'd disagree with your steps, and replace them with these:
Step one: Cast a 10 minute casting time spell.
Step two: Begin concentrating to maintain spell.
Step three: Ask 1st Question of the Being you have contacted.
Step four: Make an Int check as the Being attempts to overwhelm you.
Step five: receive answer or have mind blasted, depending on result of the check.
Step six: Stop concentrating, or ask another question.
The spell explicitly states that you must expend a standard action concentrating to ask a question, that you can ask one question per round, and that before you get the answer to your first question you have to make the check to avoid being overwhelmed. The spell explicitly states that the loss happens before the first answer is received, not as soon as you finish casting.
But now I'll drop it, because my CHA doesn't need to drop any lower.
Show me where the text says ANYTHING about the being trying to overwhelm you.
That's not why you're making the INT check.
Sure:
Contact Other Plane says:
Contact with minds far removed from your home plane increases the probability that you will incur a decrease in Intelligence and Charisma due to your brain being overwhelmed, but also increases the chance of the power knowing the answer and answering correctly.
It also says:
If you lose Intelligence and Charisma, the effect strikes as soon as the first question is asked, and no answer is received.
So, you are contacting a mind with a question. As soon as you do, the resentful power tries to blow your mind out of your head. If he fails, he grudgingly gives a brief answer. The question you are contacting that mind with is NOT being asked until the spell casting has been completed and you are on to the 'concentration and taking standard actions' portion of the proceedings. It is NOT happening as soon as the spell is cast.
Sorry Brian, I lied, I'm apparently not done. I feel my diplomacy checks getting weaker.
|
Show me where the text says ANYTHING about the being trying to overwhelm you.
That's not why you're making the INT check.
"Contact with minds far removed from your home plane increases the probability that you will incur a decrease in Intelligence and Charisma due to your brain being overwhelmed,..."
"The powers reply in a language you understand, but they resent such contact..."
Again, if the intent was to allow you to take 10, you could cast the spell without risk of failure a 6 intelligence.
If your DM let's you do it, as I see it you have two options. You can thank them, or you can be sad your game isn't going to be very challenging because your DM has no backbone.
Whatever floats your boat, but there is no way that taking 10 was part of the plan when they wrote the spell.
|
|
I have to agree with liquid, despite his insulting language.
By the rules, you can take 10 on the Int check. You can argue the interpretation of 'distracted or threatened' all you want, but since the spell does not describe you as such, you are not restricted from taking 10.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/c/contact-other-plane
The wording isn't threatened. The wording "When a character or creature is not in immediate danger or distracted, it may choose to take 10 on some rolls."
and
"For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible to take 10."
As to things in the spell that are distracting, first and foremost is this line.
"You must concentrate on maintaining the spell (a standard action) in order to ask questions at the rate of one per round."
Again, you aren't taking 10 on the casting of the spell, in the same way you take 10 on picking a lock or disarming a trap. The spell is to contact another plane and ask questions of beings you meet there, who are irritated at you bugging them. The check is to make sure your brain isn't boiled in the process.
Take 10 isn't something you can always do. It is something you can do under ideal circumstances if you aren't distracted or in immediate danger.
If you have to use a standard action to concentrate on maintaining the spell, while asking questions, you are distracted.
Again, if it was intended so that you could take 10, the low save DC wouldn't be less than 10.
|
I don't care about intent, I care about what is. Nothing in the description states you are distracted. That is your interpretation of it.
You would have a better chance of convincing me you cannot take 10 because you are in danger of taking Int/Cha damage. At least that is clearly stated in the rules, instead of being inferred.
|
|
I don't care about intent, I care about what is. Nothing in the description states you are distracted. That is your interpretation of it.
You would have a better chance of convincing me you cannot take 10 because you are in danger of taking Int/Cha damage. At least that is clearly stated in the rules, instead of being inferred.
You have to concentrate for a standard action, in addition to having a conversation with someone on another plane which could be so overwhelming it fries your brains for weeks.
I would consider that an immediate danger as well, but one could argue disarming a trap is an immediate danger as well, and we would all agree you can take 10 on that (assuming there are no other dangers or distractions at the time). For me the difference is that disarming a trap is a specific action you are trained at, no different than picking a lock except for the possible boom.
This spell is you sending your mind to another plan, using a standard action each round to do nothing but concentrate on maintaining it, asking questions of powerful beings who resent your intrusion. The check is you seeing if this drives you crazy, not the skill of casting the spell itself.
I am learning lately there is a lot of variance in the reading of rules. Take 10 has always been something you could only do under ideal circumstances in all the groups I have played in. The threshold for "distracting" or "immediate danger" has always been fairly low in our groups, and the stuff going on in that spell would be WAY beyond any threshold any group I play in would allow. If I asked to take 10 for this, it would become a running joke at the table for months.
You and I are often on different ends of a lot agreements, always respectfully. On this one I guess there is a school of thought that views take 10 as a given, while in all my games take 10 has been something you could only do when conditions were ideal.
If you don't care about the intent of the rule, I don't see common ground we can come to. It is clear that if the save DC is 7, that scale wasn't written assuming you could take 10. If you can take 10, this spell become silly at high levels, as if you have a headband of intellect you can make a greater deity answer your questions with no risk. That clearly isn't RAI.
If you aren't trying to play "rule as intended", then what are you trying to play?
the take ten thing seems a silly argument. whatvwould be the point of mentioning the int check if no one capable of casting the spell could fail the check? it's a bit ludicrous that if the take ten rule were correct un regards to this spell the only people who can fail it would actually get smarter?
I really don't think this is a raw vs ray issue. it's a lack of common sense one.
the take ten thing seems a silly argument. whatvwould be the point of mentioning the int check if no one capable of casting the spell could fail the check? it's a bit ludicrous that if the take ten rule were correct un regards to this spell the only people who can fail it would actually get smarter?
I really don't think this is a raw vs ray issue. it's a lack of common sense one.
However, you can fail the check if you cast the spell in a place where you could get distracted by something else... or somebody blunders in and distracts you.
Show me where the text says ANYTHING about the being trying to overwhelm you.
That's not why you're making the INT check.
"Contact with minds far removed from your home plane increases the probability that you will incur a decrease in Intelligence and Charisma due to your brain being overwhelmed,..."
"The powers reply in a language you understand, but they resent such contact..."
Again, if the intent was to allow you to take 10, you could cast the spell without risk of failure a 6 intelligence.
If your DM let's you do it, as I see it you have two options. You can thank them, or you can be sad your game isn't going to be very challenging because your DM has no backbone.
Whatever floats your boat, but there is no way that taking 10 was part of the plan when they wrote the spell.
I am a DM, and my games are plenty challenging even when players use this tactic. Of course, I'm not incompetent, so that makes it easier.
Yes, you can do it without risk at +6. Sorcerers may also cast the spell, and less reliably than wizards. Wizards also may have lower than a +6 int at level 9 or 10.
It's really very simple. I understand that you don't like it, but that doesn't mean it's not both correct and intended. I also understand that you think a high level, supremely intelligent wizard should have to take a wild guess every morning when he prepares his spells. However, that's just plain ridiculous.
Not +6. You can do it with a score of 6.
As in 6, with a -3 to intelligence.
-3 + Take 10 is a 7
7 is the save for elemental plane.
So by your reading, if you have an intelligence of 6, you can take 10, have a score of 7 and contact the elemental plane without any risk.
If that is how you DM, I wish you and your players well. But that is your game.
Without adding anything constructive, I'll say that intelligence 6 does not give a -3 intelligence, intelligence 4 does.
Personally I could go with either explanation, in my games I will let players roll in this case, because the spell will be less boring that way and I think it is intended to be rolled.
As a sidenote I do not like the take 10 rule so much and only really use it when it speeds up things or makes it easier to use such as with standard stealth and perception checks and many other checks that haveto be rolled frequently.
In the rare case that a player will make a non-routine check which might have a significant outcome I will let the player roll, like contact other plane should have unpredictable results in my opinion, always taking 10 just to be save makes the spell rather boring.
How many wizards will even consider using it if the DC of the save requires one to roll 11+ without a cleric near to provide a sure bet mental fix ?
Please, could we stop speaking about 'Taking 10 on Contact Other Planes' in this thread and continue the discussion on 'Bolstering lower-tier classes in a campaign' ?
The discussion on the rules of the spell are IMHO a little too much off-topic by now... You can always start a new thread about that without derailing too much this discussion.
Just my 2c, and peace to all.
|
|
However, you can fail the check if you cast the spell in a place where you could get distracted by something else... or somebody blunders in and distracts you.the take ten thing seems a silly argument. whatvwould be the point of mentioning the int check if no one capable of casting the spell could fail the check? it's a bit ludicrous that if the take ten rule were correct un regards to this spell the only people who can fail it would actually get smarter?
I really don't think this is a raw vs ray issue. it's a lack of common sense one.
It takes 10 minutes to cast the spell. This isn't an "in combat" spell you do when someone may blunder in on you.
|
|
Please, could we stop speaking about 'Taking 10 on Contact Other Planes' in this thread and continue the discussion on 'Bolstering lower-tier classes in a campaign' ?
The discussion on the rules of the spell are IMHO a little too much off-topic by now... You can always start a new thread about that without derailing too much this discussion.
Just my 2c, and peace to all.
I know it feels off topic, but it actually fits into the larger topic.
That being, their are no tiers anymore (if there ever were) there are roles. The spells do specific things and as daily allotments have a use cost that skills don't.
If you DM fairly and realistically, every class can be useful to the groups they are in.
It is more often a player not building to be a useful part of a team than a class being overpowered.
It takes 10 minutes to cast the spell. This isn't an "in combat" spell you do when someone may blunder in on you.
"David the Diviner was having a lovely morning. He'd been woken up in his extravagent tower by his faithful servent Toby, dressed in elegant robes, and prepared his spells, just as he would any other day, with a practiced precision. After choosing a fresh apple tart for breakfast along with a strong mug of coffee (with the smallest splash of creme liquor, just the way he liked it) he started his daily work. Getting paid most handsomely for finding out spots of information for the local lord (including but not limited to whether or not his wife had been faithful the true parentage of his newborn son which looked little like him) he began there. After a 10 minute ritual of chanting to otherworldly powers he felt divine contact with a Desna, and saw floating motes of incorporeal dream energies dance before him steeled himself to recieve her insight. While the presence of such an entity could shatter the feeble minds of lesser men, David knew that his comprehension and resolve couldn't falter even when dealing with spells and beings of this magnitude. As he asked his first question he felt knowledge pouring into himself, answering his call. Just at that very moment, Toby arrived with a hot pot of coffee to top him off and tray of pastries should he still feel a bit peckish. His concentration wavering for just a brief second as the servent stumbled in, the sudden surge of knowledge overwhelmed him, ending his spell and reducing him to sniveling fool as years of knowledge leaked free from his brain. With all of his foresight and practice, David had forgotten to alert the help."
But seriously, I can't remember ever having a player use CoP. When they want answers they tend to use Commune. I think RAW favors being able to take 10 for the spell, though I don't feel that it was intended as such, and it is easy to interperet as a dangerous or distracting situation.
...
If you DM fairly and realistically, every class can be useful to the groups they are in.
...
+1
If folks really want to know the answer, I set up a thread to try and get the question asked by using the FAQ system. Please discontinue the discussion here, stop by the new thread, hit the FAQ button, and (if you must) continue the debate on the new thread, NOT here.
Thanks!
That being, their are no tiers anymore (if there ever were) there are roles. The spells do specific things and as daily allotments have a use cost that skills don't.If you DM fairly and realistically, every class can be useful to the groups they are in.
It is more often a player not building to be a useful part of a team than a class being overpowered.
I would disagree that the tiers don't exist anymore. I feel that they are now much more relevant to a characters versatility then a measure of "power". (I think this was always the intent of the tier system, but in 3.5 the higher tier classes were just generally more powerful as well.)
For example, if the party needs to cross to the other side of the Bottomless Pit O'Doom, a lower level caster with a few fly scrolls can get the whole party across, but even high level martial characters would be unable to accomplish this same task.
[Note: I'm NOT using this to say that casters are better, or that fighters should be able to fly, just pointing out that magic can accomplish things that weapons, skills, and feats can't).
Sometimes as a GM you have to specifically change things so that all the classes stay relevant. It might not be fair or realistic, but breaking the "15 minute adventuring day" (and various other tropes) ARE necessary if you want all the classes to shine.
I would agree that often "over-powered" character problems are often selfish player, or poor teamwork problems. If you allow a character to powergame their stats, their spells, their equipment, their class development, and even aspects of the campaign, then of course there will be problems.
I removed a post and a reply to it. Veiled personal attacks are not better than naked ones.
|
|
That being, their are no tiers anymore (if there ever were) there are roles. The spells do specific things and as daily allotments have a use cost that skills don't.If you DM fairly and realistically, every class can be useful to the groups they are in.
It is more often a player not building to be a useful part of a team than a class being overpowered.
I would disagree that the tiers don't exist anymore. I feel that they are now much more relevant to a characters versatility then a measure of "power". (I think this was always the intent of the tier system, but in 3.5 the higher tier classes were just generally more powerful as well.)
For example, if the party needs to cross to the other side of the Bottomless Pit O'Doom, a lower level caster with a few fly scrolls can get the whole party across, but even high level martial characters would be unable to accomplish this same task.
[Note: I'm NOT using this to say that casters are better, or that fighters should be able to fly, just pointing out that magic can accomplish things that weapons, skills, and feats can't).Sometimes as a GM you have to specifically change things so that all the classes stay relevant. It might not be fair or realistic, but breaking the "15 minute adventuring day" (and various other tropes) ARE necessary if you want all the classes to shine.
I would agree that often "over-powered" character problems are often selfish player, or poor teamwork problems. If you allow a character to powergame their stats, their spells, their equipment, their class development, and even aspects of the campaign, then of course there will be problems.
I view it differently. If my caster can do it, I don't need to invest in UMD, Potions, Wands, etc...If my fighter can remove the hit points and soak damage, I can focus on SoD, etc...
Parties fill in roles, but each can "can" find ways to solve problems that will confront them. Ideally you have a diverse party that allows each class to do what it does best, but Pathfinder did a lot to make more things available to more classes.
it seems to me to get back on topic. that ultimately any campaign can have any class be effective. but if your group is 3 melee martial types a cleric and a Magritte and every encounter is flying invisible wizards then it's pretty evident whonis going to shine.
push encounters to remove the 15 minute work day and adjust your encounters so everyone has sonething to do.
The guy with glitter cannon?