|
I have a level 2 Bard in my group, that likes to use Fascinate whenever possible, and leaves it up to me to tell him if it's possible in that situation. Which is fine, but I just want to ask how other GM's have been ruling on it during combat. Here's how I am running it and it seems fair, but maybe I'm still giving it too much power.
During combat, he can Fascinate one target at a time, if the target saves against it, it can never be the target again. If it fails then it is fascinated and he must keep performing to keep it that way.
If anyone attacks in the area, I let the fascinated bad guy roll a save each round on his turn, as an "obvious threat" occurred near by but not to him specifically. If he saves, he can immediately act, and doesn't have to wait for his next turn. If he fails, he can delay.
If he is attacked directly, fascination immediately ends, and if he is still delayed he will act immediately after the attack on him is complete.
I have heard that some GM's only allow fascinate in battle if the Bard uses it during a surprise round using stealth before the NPC feels threatened at all. I've also heard GM's not allowing it's use in combat all together.
I don't think it's so bad for the Bard to take one NPC out of the fight momentarily, but it's really quite a powerful tool against monsters with low Will, as they will likely stay out of the battle entirely.
Also, when the Bard get's higher in levels and can affect more than one target, and the saves get much harder to hit, the way I'm running it might become very troublesome for me to have any meaningful combat encounters with the group.
What do you think?
|
I have a level 2 Bard in my group, that likes to use Fascinate whenever possible, and leaves it up to me to tell him if it's possible in that situation. Which is fine, but I just want to ask how other GM's have been ruling on it during combat. Here's how I am running it and it seems fair, but maybe I'm still giving it too much power.
During combat, he can Fascinate one target at a time, if the target saves against it, it can never be the target again. If it fails then it is fascinated and he must keep performing to keep it that way.
If anyone attacks in the area, I let the fascinated bad guy roll a save each round on his turn, as an "obvious threat" occurred near by but not to him specifically. If he saves, he can immediately act, and doesn't have to wait for his next turn. If he fails, he can delay.
If he is attacked directly, fascination immediately ends, and if he is still delayed he will act immediately after the attack on him is complete.
I have heard that some GM's only allow fascinate in battle if the Bard uses it during a surprise round using stealth before the NPC feels threatened at all. I've also heard GM's not allowing it's use in combat all together.
I don't think it's so bad for the Bard to take one NPC out of the fight momentarily, but it's really quite a powerful tool against monsters with low Will, as they will likely stay out of the battle entirely.
Also, when the Bard get's higher in levels and can affect more than one target, and the saves get much harder to hit, the way I'm running it might become very troublesome for me to have any meaningful combat encounters with the group.
What do you think?
Definition of Fascinated:
"Any obvious threat, such as someone drawing a weapon, casting a spell..."
In combat, there will be drawn weapons and casting spells. I would judge that it is not usable in combat, seeing as the effect would break as soon as anyone does something dangerous.
|
|
"Any obvious threat, such as someone drawing a weapon, casting a spell..."In combat, there will be drawn weapons and casting spells. I would judge that it is not usable in combat, seeing as the effect would break as soon as anyone does something dangerous.
The quote for fascinate that you quoted indicates that the drawn or pointed weapon or spell has to be “at” the fascinated creature. So simply combat happening nearby won’t break it, just give him a save every round that it is nearby.
I think the OP has it correct.
|
|
"Any obvious threat, such as someone drawing a weapon, casting a spell..."In combat, there will be drawn weapons and casting spells. I would judge that it is not usable in combat, seeing as the effect would break as soon as anyone does something dangerous.
The quote for fascinate that you quoted indicates that the drawn or pointed weapon or spell has to be “at” the fascinated creature. So simply combat happening nearby won’t break it, just give him a save every round that it is nearby.
I think the OP has it correct.
It only lists that for ranged weapons. A melee weapon can't be drawn "at" someone, neither can a spell such as fireball. Plus, there is the line of "any obvious threat". I would find a drawn sword in my immediate presence an obvious threat.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I find myself mostly agreeing with Alexander. If anyone were able to threaten the target, it should get another saving throw, perhaps at a substantial bonus.
Otherwise, imagine the phenomenon of a bard fascinating a target, and then the rest of the party steps up to it with blades, shocking grasp spells, and fire-crackling axes drawn, ready to attack en mass. If that sounds abusive to you, then nearby combat ought to break the effect just as easily.
|
|
I find myself mostly agreeing with Alexander. If anyone were able to threaten the target, it should get another saving throw, perhaps at a substantial bonus.
Otherwise, imagine the phenomenon of a bard fascinating a target, and then the rest of the party steps up to it with blades, shocking grasp spells, and fire-crackling axes drawn, ready to attack en mass. If that sounds abusive to you, then nearby combat ought to break the effect just as easily.
Actually I believe that is exactly how its supposed to work Chris.
If you specifically threaten the fascinated creature, then it breaks the fascinate. Combat happening nearby gives them another save.
But this ability is meant to be able to be used in combat.
|
But this ability is meant to be able to be used in combat.
I'd disagree. There's nothing other than interpretation to indicate that nearby combat (especially against the victim's allies) wouldn't break it.
I'd go out on a limb and say instead that Fascinate was instead intended by the game designers to be used outside of combat to hold a victim enthralled to allow a teammate to sneak past, pick his pocket, or something similar.
|
|
as I read the replys and thought about how I have ruled it, I was stuck by a situation this weekend.
Our party entered the next room of combat. There was magic items being worked on and my wizard became "fascinated" by what was going on. So while combat went on my wizard carried on conversation with one of the slaves. Wasnt feeling in danger at all. Now if my party started dieing that would have changed. So i say all that to suggest that it may be possible to have combat going and not feel threatened by it. I must think on this more.
|
|
I just found this in the rules for it which would seem to indicate it's not a useful combat ability at all, I don't know how I missed this before:
"The distraction of a nearby combat or other dangers prevents the ability from working."
I'm going to have to rule it then that if the creature can see or hear combat, or has already acted in the combat, it's immune.