| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Entitlement is the assumption that the players have all the knowledge of how to make or do such a thing just because the BBEG does.
Verisimilitude =/= entitlement. Same argument as last time. Someone mentioned making up a poison that kept you in a stupor and inflicted a spellcasting failure chance. Naturally the PC with the +23 Craft (alchemy) is going to want to know what the DC / cost is to create said poison, because they are obviously expert alchemists unlike that which the world regularly sees.
Same deal here. The guy with the +23 Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft is going to be able to identify such a thing, and will be able to craft it themselves. Making up items that only NPCs can use is pretty much universally stupid; and creates a players vs GM mindset instead of a shared group activity mindset. It's like the nonsense of giving drow tons of really amazing high powered weapons that you can't take with you or they crumble to dust (yes this is a jab at old adamantine).
It's really not necessary, and it messes up the verisimilitude of the world. I for one never arm my NPCs with anything I wouldn't be comfortable with my PCs having access to (because what's good for the goose). It's entirely possible to challenge or even steamroll PCs using far more mundane and reasonable tactics (many have already been mentioned here, such as merely tying them up -- which works on psions too by the way --, denying them rest, putting them in bonds, or just threatening them with really mean things).
It's not entitlement to want the world to make sense, and for things to be consistent. It's not entitlement to simply want things to make sense in the context of the game. In general, you want to avoid fridge logic and other plot or verisimilitude problems, and a good way to do so is just play everything strait.
GM fiat is a powerful tool, but it's like a nuke. It might save your world from aliens, or it might turn everything into a radioactive wasteland filled with sad and pathetic mutated mockeries of all that was good in the world. Let's leave the three headed dogs as monsters and not metaphors for the state of our campaigns. :P
========================================================================
On a side note, sometimes it might be useful to keep in mind that PCs might end up on the trigger side of the most surprising guns. A Red Hand of Doom remix I'm running features a powerful half-dragon hydra. The creature has 9 heads (complete with breath weapons), fast healing 19, a very nasty attack routine, the snatch feat, and a 20 ft swim speed and 40 ft. fly speed. What did the PCs do?
They charmed it. Turns out the critter has an Int 4 (it worked for the bad guys, and could understand morality / rudimentary tactics) and speaks multiple languages. Now the critter is charmed, and they can communicate with it. So currently they are riding around on a gargantuan flying 9-headed acid breathing hydra-dragon thingy. I've been rather amused by it.
Of course, the hydra will probably go down when they encounter a rather large pack of goblins later. It's not immune to fire (acid yes, fire no) and some quality fire-bombing and they might be spending more time trying to rescue their giant acid breathing bro than they are killing the goblins. XD
|
And if it is a unique poison the BBEG invented, your vast knowledge and study is no help to you. Much like how to make runewells seems to have been lost to time.
The game is full of artifacts you can't make. The fact you can't make them is part of why you have to go find them.
And also why the magic item guidelines say they are "estimates" and that they "require at least some judgment calls."
If the BBEG discovered something, it is by definition not something you would "know".
Again, a simple trick knot solves all the problems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Entitlement is the assumption that the players have all the knowledge of how to make or do such a thing just because the BBEG does.
The PC's are entitled to know that the bad guys work under the same rules as everyone else. The BBEG figured out how to do it, after all. That doesn't mean it has to be easy, of course, or automatic, just possible.
|
|
Entitlement is the assumption that the players have all the knowledge of how to make or do such a thing just because the BBEG does.The PC's are entitled to know that the bad guys work under the same rules as everyone else. The BBEG figured out how to do it, after all. That doesn't mean it has to be easy, of course, or automatic, just possible.
And if the players want to learn the weird knot that prevents spellcasters from casting spells, let them roll to try.
I agree this isn't Nam, there are rules. But if you want the BBEG to come up with something new, the players can't expect to have foreknowledge of it, can they?
|
|
This is barely a skirmish.Semantics.
I've been good tonight, I didn't even wade into the "use the 3rd edition version of the spell without spell resistance" stuff in the other thread.
Given how liberally the rules seem to be interpreted, it seemed unfair tell a GM they can't have flexibility in a very basic plot point.
And if it is a unique poison the BBEG invented, your vast knowledge and study is no help to you.
There's a big difference between reverse engineering something and inventing something. Especially when you can get access to the BBEG's lab and equipment after you've beaten him down.
|
|
And if it is a unique poison the BBEG invented, your vast knowledge and study is no help to you.There's a big difference between reverse engineering something and inventing something. Especially when you can get access to the BBEG's lab and equipment after you've beaten him down.
And if you can, great. No one is saying you shouldn't be able to do what the BBEG can do, if you go through the same process he did.
But if the poison is made from the blood of 1000 baby ducklings mixed with the tears of the last unicorn...
What I am saying is that sometimes the BBEG knows stuff the players don't, or will do things the players won't.
And that is ok. Not only ok, but sometimes needed. Because if the players can do and make everything, why not sit home and open a magic store/workshop?
Unhallow the cells, tie (nonstandard usage) Modify Memory to it, leading to an endless loop of waking up, "where am I?" thought.
The constantly beat them unconscious method might work. Some sort of antimagic field might work. You obviously indend for them to escape at some point. So . . . . I would drug them all this lets them remember all sorts of fun things the BBEG has in store for them but this particular rare drug not only gets them high, and compliant but it has the added effect of disrupting magic. When the time comes for them to have opportunity to escape. The drugg addicted guard who takes some of the meds used to pacifiy the prisoners takes too much and the meds effecting the PC's wear off.Player: "What's the cost and DC to craft it? I have a +23 alchemy check, and I'd like to synthesize or create my own version of this poison; since I'm one of the greats ****ing chemists in the world."
Roll 1d4 on the following random table.
Answer #1 from level 1 GM- The serum screws with your memory too you have little non-fuzzy memory.
Answer #2 from level 1 GM- Well if you find a vial of the toxin to study we can talk about what it is at that time. Given its effects so far your not sure what the problem is.
Answer #3 from level 1 GM- You were unconscious when you were drugged so you have know idea that it is an alchemical substance.
Answer #4 from level 1 GM- You know exactly what it is the legendary Anti-Magic Toxin called Addvintre Hooke it is a highly volitile substance formed the the blood of Solars treated with the breath weapon of an acient black dragon under the light of the rare vergent moon. The last vertent moon was in July another is due in ten thousand years according to the most accurate start charts.
Hey random table that should be enough xp to for level to GM. Oneday I will overcome that -2 in my prime GM stat.
|
|
Entitlement is the assumption that the players have all the knowledge of how to make or do such a thing just because the BBEG does.The PC's are entitled to know that the bad guys work under the same rules as everyone else. The BBEG figured out how to do it, after all. That doesn't mean it has to be easy, of course, or automatic, just possible.And if the players want to learn the weird knot that prevents spellcasters from casting spells, let them roll to try.
I agree this isn't Nam, there are rules. But if you want the BBEG to come up with something new, the players can't expect to have foreknowledge of it, can they?
Of course not, BUT, the PCs can expect to have a chance to figure it out once exposed to it. Wizards invent unique spells all the time; the first time he casts it at the PCs, at best they can figure out what school it's from. Further examination of its effects will reveal what it does, and the party Wizard could attempt to duplicate (or counter) it with spell research. An alchemist who encounters a poison could try to duplicate it or come up with an antidote.
The DC to do so might be high enough to give most mortals pause (DC30-35 shuts down almost everyone below a certain point); but if a PC is uber-alchemist? Can-do.
Maybe can do. If you are low level, you may not be able to, and if you are high level, it may be an artifact level thing you can't figure out how to replicate by it's nature.
I don't entirely disagree with you that it is important that the players believe everyone is playing with the same rules on both sides of the table (regardless of how 4e worked...) but I also think that it is perfectly within the GM toolbox to occasionally go "This does this thing I need it to do and no more".
Deus Machina is like pimpin'.
A necessary evil.
(editors note: I don't actually think pimpin' is necessary, although I will admit from what I'm told it ain't easy. Also I disagree with what Ben Fold's is singing here.)
What I am saying is that sometimes the BBEG knows stuff the players don't, or will do things the players won't.
Well, sometimes the BBEG will invent something new (for example; spells). Still, players get a spellcraft roll to identify some information about it when it's cast (school of magic at a minimum) or more information using detect magic or arcane sight. Alchemists that run afoul of a poison could use their great knowledge to predict its effects and possible antidotes if they can test a sample.
So, no, players aren't entitled to know everything (that's what Knowledge skills are there for after all), but they are entitled to have a chance to figure stuff out.
|
|
What I am saying is that sometimes the BBEG knows stuff the players don't, or will do things the players won't.Well, sometimes the BBEG will invent something new (for example; spells). Still, players get a spellcraft roll to identify some information about it when it's cast (school of magic at a minimum) or more information using detect magic or arcane sight. Alchemists that run afoul of a poison could use their great knowledge to predict its effects and possible antidotes if they can test a sample.
So, no, players aren't entitled to know everything (that's what Knowledge skills are there for after all), but they are entitled to have a chance to figure stuff out.
I can support this, but this is very different than the "I have a really high knowledge, so I know everything!" statement made above.
Based on what they know.
Who said that the drugs would be administered while they were conscious?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Answer #1 from level 1 GM- The serum screws with your memory too you have little non-fuzzy memory.
Answer #2 from level 1 GM- Well if you find a vial of the toxin to study we can talk about what it is at that time. Given its effects so far your not sure what the problem is.
Answer #3 from level 1 GM- You were unconscious when you were drugged so you have know idea that it is an alchemical substance.
Answer #4 from level 1 GM- You know exactly what it is the legendary Anti-Magic Toxin called Addvintre Hooke it is a highly volitile substance formed the the blood of Solars treated with the breath weapon of an acient black dragon under the light of the rare vergent moon. The last vertent moon was in July another is due in ten thousand years according to the most accurate start charts.
Hey random table that should be enough xp to for level to GM. Oneday I will overcome that -2 in my prime GM stat.
Most of those are stupid, and all of them are merely excuses that do not solve the problem, only compound it. Also, you can identify a poison that has poisoned a creature with a DC 20 Craft (alchemy) check and detect poison.
Also, for the record, talking about bad guys using artifacts or artifact-poisons to subdue some PCs really speaks volumes as to the nature of this sort of thing. It's railroading at its worst. It's nonsensical. It's stupid.
also...
Deus Machina is like pimpin'.
A necessary evil.
Is entirely false. There is no need for Deus Ex. With only a marginal amount of thinking and/or consideration, GMs can easily avoid such things. Sometimes talking things over with your group. Today with the internet being what it is, we can come to the forums here and get page after page of reasonable methods that you can use that don't require you to break verisimilitude.
That's all I'm saying. I'd probably drop a game that had NPCs walking around with artifacts everywhere that were only usable by them, or carrying around poisons that only worked for them, or any of the number of other things that have been said here that are common traits of terrible railroading GMs. These tropes aren't exactly old. We should be growing out of these things, and helping others to leap them faster.
how bout some way to drain the caster's charisma to 10?
how bout some way to drain the caster's charisma to 10?
'
i already posted a way to do this but ill post it again since people missed it. Its simple, its effective, it removes the ability to cast spells and arcane caster have a -4 to their saves, its the perfect solution.Feeblemind
how bout some way to drain the caster's charisma to 10?'
i already posted a way to do this but ill post it again since people missed it. Its simple, its effective, it removes the ability to cast spells and arcane caster have a -4 to their saves, its the perfect solution.
Feeblemind
It's also a 5th level spell, requiring a 9th level caster.
It's also a 5th level spell, requiring a 9th level caster.how bout some way to drain the caster's charisma to 10?'
i already posted a way to do this but ill post it again since people missed it. Its simple, its effective, it removes the ability to cast spells and arcane caster have a -4 to their saves, its the perfect solution.
Feeblemind
Knock them unconscious and then cast it via a scroll. They auto-fail the save because they are unconscious and considered willing, so the scroll's low save DC isn't exactly a problem. Costs 1,125 gp to preform a magilobotomy. Not that expensive given that it's cheaper than some mundane armors.
EDIT: My only concern with this is that it doesn't really leave much option for escape. I don't think it would be very fun to spend the entire escape adventure being unable to so much as speak. Honestly, casting this on the entire party is pretty much the "GG" for the badguy. Especially since you cannot use any Intelligence or Charisma based skills. Disable Device could still get you out of your cells and such (being a Dex skill you can use it while feebleminded, so even with a -2 for improvised tools you might be able to escape taking 20 if your modifier isn't bad), but overall your ability to coordinate for an escape is pretty bad. >.>
No, unconscious targets aren't considered willing. You're pulling stuff out of thin air.
Answer #1 from level 1 GM- The serum screws with your memory too you have little non-fuzzy memory.
Answer #2 from level 1 GM- Well if you find a vial of the toxin to study we can talk about what it is at that time. Given its effects so far your not sure what the problem is.
Answer #3 from level 1 GM- You were unconscious when you were drugged so you have know idea that it is an alchemical substance.
Answer #4 from level 1 GM- You know exactly what it is the legendary Anti-Magic Toxin called Addvintre Hooke it is a highly volitile substance formed the the blood of Solars treated with the breath weapon of an acient black dragon under the light of the rare vergent moon. The last vertent moon was in July another is due in ten thousand years according to the most accurate start charts.
Hey random table that should be enough xp to for level to GM. Oneday I will overcome that -2 in my prime GM stat.
Most of those are stupid, and all of them are merely excuses that do not solve the problem, only compound it. Also, you can identify a poison that has poisoned a creature with a DC 20 Craft (alchemy) check and detect poison.
Also, for the record, talking about bad guys using artifacts or artifact-poisons to subdue some PCs really speaks volumes as to the nature of this sort of thing. It's railroading at its worst. It's nonsensical. It's stupid.
Stupid level 2 GM here (apparently that -2 to is in INT)- Railroading as I have always understood it is forcing the characters into one course of actions and removing options. This is a situation where the enemy has won, rather than kill the party has left them alive, the OP asked for a way to keep the spell casters not casting spells for awhile. Now I could be wrong but I viewed this as mostly a naravtive question. As in how do I explain this to my players so when the action restarts it could be said they were imprisoned for a short time believably.
That said there are times when the PCs don't know everything. Just as a first level party can't take a Tarasque they don't know the answer to every question. This isn't a video game. It is a game that involves a mix of a many things not the least of which is story.
No, unconscious targets aren't considered willing. You're pulling stuff out of thin air.
Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing.
An unconscious character is always considered a willing target for a spell.
Stupid level 2 GM here (apparently that -2 to is in INT)- Railroading as I have always understood it is forcing the characters into one course of actions and removing options. This is a situation where the enemy has won, rather than kill the party has left them alive, the OP asked for a way to keep the spell casters not casting spells for awhile. Now I could be wrong but I viewed this as mostly a naravtive question. As in how do I explain this to my players so when the action restarts it could be said they were imprisoned for a short time believably.
That said there are times when the PCs don't know everything. Just as a first level party can't take a Tarasque they don't know the answer to every question. This isn't a video game. It is a game that involves a mix of a many things not the least of which is story.
Narrative be damned. This isn't a novel (but then again good writers also avoid fridge logic and plot holes too). A good narrative includes stuff that is reasonable and makes sense. This isn't a video game, but by golly it is a game. It's a game that says that you can simply scan someone with detect poison and ID that poison with a DC 20 alchemy check. That quite literally means if someone is suffering from a poison, you can pull your your little poison-scouter and tell what the poison is and what it does.
Likewise, nobody said they know the answer to every question. However, the game assumes that PCs have knowledge of certain things. For example, anyone with a +0 or better Int modifier can take 10 and answer any common Knowledge check without trouble (anything DC 10 or less). Likewise, anyone with a +5 knowledge skill just knows things of DC 15 or less. If you've got someone with a +10, you know really obscure stuff. +15 means you're a walking library on the esoteric. +20 means you can take 10 and hit DC 30, which is beyond the realm of most mortals. You could quite literally answer all those questions such as "what's after we die" and such by yourself.
I'm just saying that dropping GM-fiat poisons and equipment in the game is in poor taste, and creates problems with verisimilitude. That is, it directly hurts the narrative and believability of what's going on.
I mean seriously, it was suggested that we go making the antimagic field items artifacts for goodness sakes. I was once asked to GM a game as a favor to another GM. The GM authorized me to pimp out this lich with a bunch of "artifacts" that gave him/her stuff like +8 Intelligence, huge spell resistance, immunity to certain magics, and topped off with only the lich could use them; and that was "so the lich will last more than 1 round". I ended up scrapping it and rebuilding the lich at a lower level with normal NPC WBL. Lich schooled the PCs using some simple planning and working her angles (limited wish + flesh to stone works pretty good too).
The GM toolbox is big enough that we can do better.
Feeblemind is a little much, it almost totally prevents the players from playing.
How about creating a 4th level spell that causes the target to permanently lose all spellcasting abilities on a failed save? Removable with break enchantment. I don't see a problem with players having access to that at all.
Sure it makes a character totally ineffective for a while, but at least they can still play and plan. Blindness can do that too, and it's only a level 2 spell.
Depending on the character's ability scores, bestow curse could work, too. If they have an 18 on their prime stat once you take off the headbands they would suddenly be limited to level 2 spells, which seems like it would make for interesting play.
Feeblemind is a little much, it almost totally prevents the players from playing.
How about creating a 4th level spell that causes the target to permanently lose all spellcasting abilities on a failed save? Removable with break enchantment.
Sure it makes a character totally ineffective for a while, but at least they can still play and plan. Blindness can do that too, and it's only a level 2 spell.
*cough* Bestow Curse. *cough*
*cough* Bestow Curse. *cough*
I had edited to include Bestow Curse, but including "no spellcasting" as an option on that spell may be too much, considering its flexibility.
Incidentally, bestow curse is a spell that should be cast on all prisoners. Always. It's available to 5th level clerics, so it's not exactly out of the reach of most BBEGs (no rarer than animate dead). Cursing prisoners to hell and back is a good way to depower the PCs without actually making them completely useless.
For example, let's say you have some 12th level PCs who you want to try and escape your dungeon. All of them are beaten into unconsciousness and bestow curse placed on them. Might take quite a few castings, but before long all the PCs should have a -6 to all ability scores, -4 to all checks, and lose their actions 50% of the time. Later the PCs get a moment to make a break for it. Sure the BBEG's guards are all mooks, but you're all seriously depowered. So you try to overpower the guards and snag their weapons and such. Then make your way through the dungeon while your wizard uses detect magic to try and find where your gear is being kept. Fight past the ogre who is guarding your stuff (sure you're 12th level, but you're so badly debuffed that the ogre jailer is probably not a cakewalk -- especially if it's an Ogre Mage) and grab your gear.
From there, escape and go get your curses removed. Hm, I might steal this and use it in my current Red Hand Remix. I'm extending the adventure greatly, and this is giving me a lot of ideas for a nice side-quest.
Stupid level 2 GM here (apparently that -2 to is in INT)- Railroading as I have always understood it is forcing the characters into one course of actions and removing options. This is a situation where the enemy has won, rather than kill the party has left them alive, the OP asked for a way to keep the spell casters not casting spells for awhile. Now I could be wrong but I viewed this as mostly a naravtive question. As in how do I explain this to my players so when the action restarts it could be said they were imprisoned for a short time believably.
That said there are times when the PCs don't know everything. Just as a first level party can't take a Tarasque they don't know the answer to every question. This isn't a video game. It is a game that involves a mix of a many things not the least of which is story.
Narrative be damned. This isn't a novel (but then again good writers also avoid fridge logic and plot holes too). A good narrative includes stuff that is reasonable and makes sense. This isn't a video game, but by golly it is a game. It's a game that says that you can simply scan someone with detect poison and ID that poison with a DC 20 alchemy check. That quite literally means if someone is suffering from a poison, you can pull your your little poison-scouter and tell what the poison is and what it does.
Likewise, nobody said they know the answer to every question. However, the game assumes that PCs have knowledge of certain things. For example, anyone with a +0 or better Int modifier can take 10 and answer any common Knowledge check without trouble (anything DC 10 or less). Likewise, anyone with a +5 knowledge skill just knows things of DC 15 or less. If you've got someone with a +10, you know really obscure stuff. +15 means you're a walking library on the esoteric. +20 means you can take 10 and hit DC 30, which is beyond the realm of most mortals. You could quite literally answer all those questions such as "what's after we die" and such by yourself.
...
You are assuming that they are able to cast the detect poison spell while they are under the effects of the substance keeping them from casting spells.
By your definition of railroading it also means that you can't lock them in a cell with a lock beyond the skill of the rogue, put the barbarian in manicles he can't break or put them in any situation beyond their skill.
I am not sure how in a world with both magic and drugs it is an illogical plot hole to suggest a drug that blocks spell casting, but I am just a level 2 gm and you get to just declare things illogical because you don't like it and stupid because you disagree.
You are assuming that they are able to cast the detect poison spell while they are under the effects of the substance keeping them from casting spells.
Nope. Just saying that someone with a sufficiently high alchemy check should be able to recreate the poison, if only with an idea of what he wants it to do. If you wouldn't feel comfortable as a GM with your PCs having a poison that nullifies spellcasting, then your NPCs shouldn't have it either. Fair is fair, and there are other options. EDIT: Also I was just pointing out that all they would need is someone suffering from the poison and someone who could cast detect poison. Even if it was from a magic item that the PC smuggled in by swallowing it. The point is that poisons can be identified. It doesn't matter if you can do it right now, only that it can be done.
By your definition of railroading it also means that you can't lock them in a cell with a lock beyond the skill of the rogue, put the barbarian in manicles he can't break or put them in any situation beyond their skill.
I'm not sure where you arrived at this conclusion, but it's far off base. Most of these things are pretty mundane. Putting a superior lock (150 gp, DC 40 to open) on a door is likely to put the rogue in a bind, especially if he has to use improvised tools. Casting arcane lock on the barbarian's manacles to increase the break DC by +10 is fair game. Tying up a spellcaster so he can't cast spells until rescued or putting his escape Artist check to the ultimate test is cool and calculated. Casting bestow curse on the party to weaken them is a dick move on the part of the BBEG (not the GM) and is fine. Placing proximity alarm traps is fine. Hell, it's entirely and logically possible to ensure that the party may never see the light of day again for under 3,000 gp worth of resources.
However, I wouldn't want to see the BBEG having access to items that only work for him, or making up poisons that don't exist and just saying your PCs don't know what it is nor can they without your whim, or arbitrarily setting the DC to open the lock on the door to 60 just because you want the lock to be hard for the rogue to open, or just having the manacles the barbarian is wearing unbreakable because it suits your "narrative" for the barbarian to not break out right now. I do consider those sorts of things railroading and bad GMing of a high order. If you want absolute control, then go write a book. If you want to play a role-playing game then play the damn game and realize it's not GM vs PCs, it's a community experience.
You're arguing for breaking verisimilitude to suit some sort of strange goal of "narrative", which last time I checked verisimilitude is a very important thing to the narrative of a story.
I am not sure how in a world with both magic and drugs it is an illogical plot hole to suggest a drug that blocks spell casting, but I am just a level 2 gm and you get to just declare things illogical because you don't like it and stupid because you disagree.
I don't think I've suggested that you shouldn't use magic or drugs. Only that people not do it in a douchebaggery GM-fiaty railroady kind of way. Want some good drugs to keep PCs pacified? Drow poison works wonders. Pump 'em up with enough of it and they're out for hours. Pretty cheap stuff at a mere 75 gp market price. Or you could severely lower their Concentration checks by hopping them up on some mental-damage poisons (some of these are even inhaled and thus can be stacked easily and affect the whole party). Keeping the drugged and at 0 in a non-Con statistic can hold them in a coma or stupor unable to take actions.
Likewise, I'm pretty sure I mentioned the use of resetting cantrip traps to prevent preparation of spells from memory or regaining spells. The use of low-level magics (3rd or less) to subdue and contain the PCs (bestow curse, true strike + tie up, alarm spells, etc). The only thing I've spoke out against was the idea of giving the bad guys magic items worth a half a million gp and using them against the PCs while saying "only these guys can use them, you can't sell them, they're worthless, except when used against you" (which ignores the fact the party could use Use Magic Device to activate the items anyway, without yet more GM-fiat. It's like a lie that snowballs, really). And I extended that to being against other instances of some tomfoolery such as inventing poisons up out of nothing and telling the PCs they don't know what is no matter how knowledgeable they should be in the field.
If you cannot tell the difference, our discussion has been done for a while.
Ashiel, I think you are reading things between the lines that I am not putting out there. I probably doing the same. I simply suggested a new kind of drug. I kept it rare and given the situation I felt it logical that the PCs would not know what happened to them because I opperated from the assumption that they were defeated at the start, ie, unconscious, or dying so unless the GM tells them they were poisoned after the fact they really would have know way of knowing. Literally I was assuming this is a single sentance of game time. "You awake, amazed your alive, unsure of where you are." Done. Later they migh learn they were prisoners for weeks. They might remember snipets of torture or interaction of their captors.
I would be opposed to multiple sessions not able to do anything or cast a spell for any reason. I would want the story to move along.
Remember that splint mail you bought when you were a first level fighter? Put it on the prisoner. Seriously.
You've prevented any monk or Druid from doing much of anything, slowed the barbarians, given armor check penalties to clerics, wizards, sorcerers, and rogues, huge spell casting penalties to arcane casters, and shut down both tumbling and evasion.
Also, 20 ft move. Pretty good for the price.
Remember that splint mail you bought when you were a first level fighter? Put it on the prisoner. Seriously.
You've prevented any monk or Druid from doing much of anything, slowed the barbarians, given armor check penalties to clerics, wizards, sorcerers, and rogues, huge spell casting penalties to arcane casters, and shut down both tumbling and evasion.
Also, 20 ft move. Pretty good for the price.
If you wanted to be a huge douche (and by you I mean the BBEG), you could probably figure out a way to lock the armor on the wearer (such as placing superior locks on the buckles or something) to make it difficult to take off.
Ashiel, I think you are reading things between the lines that I am not putting out there. I probably doing the same. I simply suggested a new kind of drug. I kept it rare and given the situation I felt it logical that the PCs would not know what happened to them because I opperated from the assumption that they were defeated at the start, ie, unconscious, or dying so unless the GM tells them they were poisoned after the fact they really would have know way of knowing. Literally I was assuming this is a single sentance of game time. "You awake, amazed your alive, unsure of where you are." Done. Later they migh learn they were prisoners for weeks. They might remember snipets of torture or interaction of their captors.
I would be opposed to multiple sessions not able to do anything or cast a spell for any reason. I would want the story to move along.
Fair enough. It's easy to sometimes misunderstand what we mean, especially when we're talking to multiple people at multiple times. I apparently thought you were talking about something you weren't and vice-versa. Sure, knowing exactly what sort of poison was currently active in their bodies wouldn't be expected the moment they woke up. Nor would a poison that suppresses spellcasting necessarily be a terrible idea. Just what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and I would advise caution concerning poisons that you would think were cheesy if the PCs were to use them as well (an alchemist could easily turn such a poison into a contact or injury poison and then use it to one-shot spellcasters).
For drugging them up, I really do suggest drow poison. The stuff is pretty darn cheap (25 gp to create it) and knocks people out hardcore (DC 13 = unconscious for a while, then unconscious for several hours). Keep 'em pumped full of that stuff and you could keep 'em under for a long time. Alternatively, small centipede poison deals up to 4 dex damage per dose. Adding a syringe item that can apply multiple doses of injury poison at once (thus allowing you to increase the duration/DC as you can with other types of poison) would be a cool option if you wanted to add something new. That would even allow you to have the whole ominous scary scene where the big bad has the party members strapped to a table as he administers the paralysis poison and monologues a bit. ^-^
Just to kind of help with the original topic at hand for the OP, here is the item I used.
The Basilisk's Torment:
Head Slot
CL 11
Price Unknown ATM
This terrifying mask is used by special dungeons to house and imprison mages of great power. When placed upon someone's face, the wearer must make a DC 19 Fortitude check for every hour they wear the mask. If the wearer fails the check, they instantly turn into stone as if affected by the flesh to stone spell. The mask does not fuse with the body and can be removed as normal. Removing the mask requires a special key made for each mask, or picking the mask lock on a DC 30. If removed, the subject instantly reverts back to their normal selves.
Requires Craft Wonderous Item and knowing Flesh to Stone and Arcane Lock.
I hope this helps. As a note, this was really meant for levels 8+, where you'll have people with Silent or Still Spells a bit more often. At early levels, tying them up is fine. I didn't bother to price it but I'm sure you could if you want. Good luck.
No, unconscious targets aren't considered willing. You're pulling stuff out of thin air.Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing.An unconscious character is always considered a willing target for a spell.
Being unconscious does not mean you don't get a save.
All that quote means is that spells that require willing targets (and possibly those with the "harmless" descriptor) work just fine on unconscious targets. This was clarified long ago in both editions of the game.
For example, if I cast dominate person on a sleeping target they get a save to negate. If I cast teleport or protection from evil, however, than it works just fine (as they are considered willing).
Also, it helps to include the ENTIRE context of one's quotes:
Some spells restrict you to willing targets only. Declaring yourself as a willing target is something that can be done at any time (even if you're flat-footed or it isn't your turn). Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing.
Obviously, your quote is referring back to the previous sentence that you neglected.
I'm pretty sure this has already been discussed,but i don't find what i really need.
Soon i could need a home rule to prevent a couple of spellcasters from casting their spells,a magus and a sorcerer.
It is still hypothetical,but i'm pondering the possibility of having my party captured/enslaved soon or in upcoming quests,but now the problems i'm having is how to do it.
I know a GM must be extra careful when handling such situations,and the real concern isn't to arrange for a cool escape,but how to keep the spellcasters imprisoned for awhile.
When a player asked me, i told him "of course there are ways of keeping you from casting your spells...or else when a BBEG captures the PCs,and it happens sometimes,the only other possible choice to be sure you won't cast the spells you still have memorized is outright killing you"
When and if it will happen however i'll need to know what such ways are;
a sorcerer (draconic bloodline if this is important)is a pain in this regard,since she already has Eschew materials and if he takes Still spells and Silence spells....i don't want to think at that;for the magus it should be enough to strip her (female elf) of spellbook/components bags,but she will still have memorized slots, and can still take the aforementioned feats.
I thought of maybe some necklace that casts a personal anti-magic field and is person-specific,so it wouldn't work on other spellcasters,but maybe i'm overacting with designing such an item? Isn't it too powerful?
I made an encounter once that I put a level seven party with a wizard, a cleric, and a summoner up against. It had four clerics, two paladins and an inquisitor. I broke the rules somewhat and gave them each the Disruptive Feat. The clerics took turns channeling energy to disrupt spells and the Inquisitor... something... I don't remember why he was there (perhaps only for RP). They were a group of Anti-arcane Church Inquisitors. you could try something like that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, unconscious targets aren't considered willing. You're pulling stuff out of thin air.Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing.An unconscious character is always considered a willing target for a spell.Being unconscious does not mean you don't get a save.
All that quote means is that spells that require willing targets (and possibly those with the "harmless" descriptor) work just fine on unconscious targets. This was clarified long ago in both editions of the game.
For example, if I cast dominate person on a sleeping target they get a save to negate. If I cast teleport or protection from evil, however, than it works just fine (as they are considered willing).
Also, it helps to include the ENTIRE context of one's quotes:
Some spells restrict you to willing targets only. Declaring yourself as a willing target is something that can be done at any time (even if you're flat-footed or it isn't your turn). Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing.Obviously, your quote is referring back to the previous sentence that you neglected.
Would you say that if you cast plane shift on a target they are considered willing but still make their saving throw? It does not say "harmless". I would take it as willing means willing. No resistance against the spell. Otherwise a caster cannot use plane shift to get an ally away from the bad guys while the ally is unconscious, because the ally might make their saving throw and remain on the plane.
EDIT: Likewise, if someone is at -1 HP and unconscious, and the cleric tries to heal them, then they would have to roll a save because while they are always considered a willing target for the spell they're unconscious and thus can't choose to fail the saving throw (being unconscious and unable to make choices and all). Likewise, that means that if you're afflicted with drow poison (unconscious) and someone tries to cast delay poison to remove the poison effect, then the person must attempt to save vs the spell because even though they are willing they aren't really willing.
Doesn't quite jive right to me.
Cure spells are harmless. Plane Shift specifically specifies willing creatures in its target line.
Seems to jive just fine to me.
Cure spells are harmless. Plane Shift specifically specifies willing creatures in its target line.
Seems to jive just fine to me.
Not the point. You're saying that you're not considered willing for the purposes of saving throws. Harmless spells allow saves but are assumed that you will willingly forgo your saving throw. If you're unconscious, you cannot choose to willingly fail a saving throw because you're not conscious to make the decision, right?
Thus even though you are a willing target for plane shift, you'd still have to make your saving throw. Except you don't, because unconscious targets are considered willing and you can willingly forgo your save. :P
Sample Bestow Curse options for imprisonment:
"You cannot concentrate when...
...alone."
...near others."
...in the dark."
...near strangers."
...within this place."
All of these are limited in scope, but destroy a caster.
"The sight of your friends fills you with great calm." -Prevents Rage on Barbarians
"Without (x), you are powerless." - All sorts of havoc here.
Cure spells are harmless. Plane Shift specifically specifies willing creatures in its target line.
Seems to jive just fine to me.
Not the point. You're saying that you're not considered willing for the purposes of saving throws. Harmless spells allow saves but are assumed that you will willingly forgo your saving throw. If you're unconscious, you cannot choose to willingly fail a saving throw because you're not conscious to make the decision, right?
Thus even though you are a willing target for plane shift, you'd still have to make your saving throw. Except you don't, because unconscious targets are considered willing and you can willingly forgo your save. :P
Don't argue to me about it. Take it to the developers who have time and again ruled that this is the way it is.
Besides, if the above quoted rules meant you got to skip a save, than spells like nightmare would never allow a save, which obviously isn't the case.
EDIT: After doing some more in depth research, I found a thread on the subject going over 200 posts with multiple designers chipping in with their thoughts.
It doesn't seem like they have any idea either.
I must be remembering rulings/FAQ from the v3.0/3.5 days. I'll see if I can dig up some more relevant links.
Sample Bestow Curse options for imprisonment:
"You cannot concentrate when...
...alone."
...near others."
...in the dark."
...near strangers."
...within this place."All of these are limited in scope, but destroy a caster.
"The sight of your friends fills you with great calm." -Prevents Rage on Barbarians
"Without (x), you are powerless." - All sorts of havoc here.
I much prefer to use Bestow Curse to give someone amnesia.
THE FOLLOWING IS CROSS-POSTED FROM THE SORCERER PRISON THREAD:
Per the Sanity and Madness rules, bestow curse can afflict someone with a single type of insanity, such as amnesia. Do you know what amnesia does to a person? Not only does it inflict a –4 penalty on Will saving throws and all skill checks, it also causes the amnesiac to lose all class abilities, feats, and skill ranks for as long as his amnesia lasts (along with the traditional loss of memory of identity, skills, and past history).
Once you've got all you need out of a prisoner through interrogation, I can't think of a more effective way of stripping someone of their power.
You could cast it twice to give someone permanent achluophobia (fear of the dark) and ahotophobia (fear of light) in order to make them perpetually frightened. For good measure, strike them down with agoraphobia too. Then they will CHOOSE not to leave their safe little prison.
No, unconscious targets aren't considered willing. You're pulling stuff out of thin air.Unconscious creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (such as one who is bound, cowering, grappling, paralyzed, pinned, or stunned) is not automatically willing.An unconscious character is always considered a willing target for a spell.
Am I the only one seeing a disturbing implication there?
And how do you knock out the caster so you CAN use the Lobotomy spell on them?
Don't argue to me about it. Take it to the developers who have time and again ruled that this is the way it is.
EDIT: Doing some research, I found a thread on the subject going over 200 posts with multiple designers chipping in with their thoughts.
It doesn't seem like they have any idea either.
I must be remembering rulings/FAQ from the v3.0/3.5 days. I'll see if I can dig up some more relevant links.
Fair enough. I'ma keep going with the unconscious = willing for all purposes bit. Just seems to work well without any weirdness going on, or strange metagamey things going on (like I mentioned before with the weird "well do you save or don't you" type questions, which are answered with this interpretation). Consider our debate formally resolved over lack of clarity? ^-^
Well at least Abraham Spalding agrees with me. Play the game however you wish, Ashiel. I will.
Well at least Abraham Spalding agrees with me. Play the game however you wish, Ashiel. I will.
I imagine if my players had a cleric who ran to their downed ally and cast stabilize to stop the ally from bleeding out and I said "roll a Will save", I'd get a look resembling something like...
Then I'd have to say, "Well you're not automatically considered willing for the purposes of saving against the spell, and you're not able to consciously choose to fail the save. You get your save."
Effectively making stabilize useless on anyone with a decent Will save. I mean, it's only a cantrip. With a 13 Wisdom (respectable for a 1st level cleric), you're looking at DC 11. You got a 50/50 chance to negate the effect even at a +0. It'll only get worse from there. :P
I'm wondering if you've misunderstood my earlier statements.
If the spell says the target needs to be willing, or is harmless, saves don't come into play at all when the target is unconscious (and thus willing).