Sleep / Deep Slumber

[reika michiko]

Alright I've dug through all the FAQ I can find and still no official answer.

So if anyone can point me to it please do so:

"There seems to be two interpretations of how Sleep/Deep Slumber works:

Creature A = 3HD
Creature B = 2HD

Theory 1: Creature B saved, and because was affected but saved, Creature A cannot be affected

Theory 2: Creature B saved, and because was NOT affected because saved, Creature A can still be affected"

Anyone have an official ruling or FAQ to show me which is correct?

[reika michiko]

No one got the answer to this one?

[Swashbucklersdc]

I always use Theory 1. The spell targets 4 HD of cretures; once you find out the targets, based on HD and how close the targets are to the effect (if of the same HD), those targets make saves to negate the spell.

[MurphysParadox]

I read it as the number of HD that failed the saves, not the number that may have to save. So Theory 2.

[reika michiko]

And this is why I was hoping to be pointed to a legit ruling, because there was a heated discussion at the last PFS game we played over which is correct.

[Matthew Downie]

I favor 1. It seems odd that because I have strong will and do not fall asleep, you must fall asleep, whereas if I had a weak will, the guy standing next to me is not affected. But I can't find anything official - just threads debating this since 2010.
How do you handle the SLEEP spell?
How does an affects xx Hit Dice spell work?

[MurphysParadox]

Well, if it happened at a PFS game, it was whatever the GM said it was. Which is also true at non-PFS games, actually, heh.

[ShadowcatX]

So the answers to the question so far, are, in order:

1, 2, maybe 1, and DM's call.

Sounds like an FAQ to me.

[Tacticslion]

Word up. And done. :)

Although we might want to rephrase the question to get as encompassing an answer as possible.

FAQ Question: when a spell or affect (such as sleep or deeper slumber affects a limited number of HD, do creatures who would be affected but succeed at their save count against the number of HD the spell can affect? Or, instead, does the spell ignore them compared to its limit, as they are not affected (due to a successful save)?

[shadowkras]

Quote:

Area one or more living creatures within a 10-ft.-radius burst

When casting, there is no distinction on HD limit.

Quote:

A sleep spell causes a magical slumber to come upon 4 HD of creatures. Creatures with the fewest HD are affected first.

It will try to sleep the weakest creatures by order of HD, when the spell reaches the HD limit of targets, it ceases functioning, as in no more targets are affected, regardless if the first few made their saves or not.

Spells arent retroactive.

[MurphysParadox]

But does the slumber come upon someone who makes the save? Or do they avoid it and the power is still there to move on to the next creature? That's the core of the question.

[shadowkras]

I dont think the power should linger around until the HD are used up, its not a lasting effect. I would say its pretty much instant, who fails, stay sleeping, who doesnt, the power tried to make them sleep and didnt work because their will was stronger.

IMO, ruling that the power would try to find a new power would be the same to ruling that Daze Monster should refund the spell slot if the target resists.

[Under A Bleeding Sun]

I read the raw as theory 2. Not sure if that is rai though.

[Tacticslion]

Opinions and readings are great: FAQs are even better! :D

[MurphysParadox]

The spell is cast and the slot is used up. When monsters are being effected, it has only 4 HD of monsters worth of energy to effect in the moment it is cast. So either those 4 HD are counted before the saves or after the saves. Any remaining HDs are voided in either case.

As you quoted "A sleep spell causes a magical slumber to come upon 4 HD of creatures." If the monster makes its save, did the magical slumber still come upon the monster? Or did that monster avoid it and it passes on to the next monster to try and save?

Daze is cast and the magic is out there. Whether or not it works on the target doesn't mean the magical energy can be recaptured. It is also not effecting monsters in a given area, but a targeted spell. This is just confusing the issue.

[Matthew Downie]

Tacticslion wrote:

FAQ Question: when a spell or affect (such as sleep or deeper slumber affects a limited number of HD, do creatures who would be affected but succeed at their save count against the number of HD the spell can affect? Or, instead, does the spell ignore them compared to its limit, as they are not affected (due to a successful save)?

The link I posted earlier - How does an affects xx Hit Dice spell work? already had a bunch of FAQ requests.

[thaX]

The HD limit is regarded effected creatures. Those that make their save is not effected.

[Tacticslion]

Matthew Downie wrote:

Tacticslion wrote:

FAQ Question: when a spell or affect (such as sleep or deeper slumber affects a limited number of HD, do creatures who would be affected but succeed at their save count against the number of HD the spell can affect? Or, instead, does the spell ignore them compared to its limit, as they are not affected (due to a successful save)?

The link I posted earlier - How does an affects xx Hit Dice spell work? already had a bunch of FAQ requests.

Somehow I missed it the first time. Sorry!

But... it has a few (and I FAQ'd it)... let's see if we can get more! :D

[seebs]

Huh, I had always thought that the HD limit determined how many creatures were picked by the spell to be its targets, and then once you picked targets, they were "affected" by the spell, and then they might save to negate any impact of being affected.

[reika michiko]

seebs wrote:

Huh, I had always thought that the HD limit determined how many creatures were picked by the spell to be its targets, and then once you picked targets, they were "affected" by the spell, and then they might save to negate any impact of being affected.

Yea its how I interpret it...

Boyfriend interprets it the other way -.-

[Hayato Ken]

Saved or not saved doesn´t matter. Once a creature has to make a save it is already affected and therefore limits the HD limit.
There is a statement from designers and other´s on this somewhere, but i´m totally too lazy to search for it right now.
Which one´s are affected first is described in the spell.

[Arlow]

Sleep select its total of hd whitin its area, from lowest hd first to highest, before you check for saves. Once you reach the max hd of the spell ( now you have you targets), the targets make their save. The spell is instantaneous and the effect ( slumber Zzz ) have its own duration in the spell. There is no lingering effect as whould act like a trap after the casting. Crafting an actual trap whit an alarm trigger of casting symbol of sleep is different ( refer to the appropriate sections of your books).

This is the way i do understand it from adnd, dnd 3. X and pf (also books i own).

[seebs]

Okay, thought about this more.

Imagine, if you will, a hypothetical spell which allows a reflex save for half damage, but which has a hit die limit.

Obviously, characters who save and take half damage count as "affected". What about characters with evasion, who save and take no damage? (Alternatively, Unbreakable archetype fighters of suitable level can do this to will or fort saves.)

Now imagine that you cast this spell on two groups of creatures. One has all creatures with evasion, the other has no creatures with evasion. Both groups have enough creatures that you'll almost certainly see at least a few failed saves.

You will do more damage to the group of creatures with evasion, since they only consume the spell's HD limit if they fail their saves...?

I don't think so. I think the intent has to be that there is a distinction between "picked as a target and obliged to roll a save" and "actually suffers damage or status change".

[seebs]

Oh, hey, there we go!

PRD wrote:

Once you know which creatures (or objects or areas) are affected, and whether those creatures have made successful saving throws (if any were allowed), you can apply whatever results a spell entails.

I think this clearly distinguishes between "are affected" and "may or may not have made saves".

[Tacticslion]

Hey! Well-found - great job! Would you mind linking that section of the PRD for me to read over?

That said, there's one thing about your argument that fails,

Quote:

You will do more damage to the group of creatures with evasion, since they only consume the spell's HD limit if they fail their saves...?

... they would, then, be affected. The fact that it allows half on a successful save means that they would be affected by virtue of the nature of the spell. Evasion is a special ability that alters the outcomes after the basic spell effects. Thus, it's an order of operations question.

Evasion would only apply if you follow the train that Evasion applies before the spell effects - if, on the other hand, you follow general -> specific logic, the spell effects would resolve, and then Evasion would apply.

The quote of the PRD you made is a much stronger case, though. :)

[Hayato Ken]

How does evasion apply to sleep?
Do you now do a reflex save to escape your sleep?

[Arlow]

Sleep pick his TARGETS up to 4 hd THEN thoses targets roll their saves against the spell. Will sage evasion ( like elf) is irrevelent since it apply after the spell choose its underdog. Undead and construct are ignored in Step 1 of the spell.

[seebs]

Hayato Ken wrote:

How does evasion apply to sleep?

Do you now do a reflex save to escape your sleep?

It doesn't. I was just pointing out that if we conclude that "did not get affected" means you don't consume HD cap, that a hypothetical spell which allows evasion and has a HD cap would end up getting to hit more people for full damage if the people in the crowd have evasion than if they don't.

As to where the rule I quoted came from:

Magic heading in the PRD

Quote:

The Spell's Result

Once you know which creatures (or objects or areas) are affected, and whether those creatures have made successful saving throws (if any were allowed), you can apply whatever results a spell entails.

That very clearly indicates that "affected" is determined first, then saving throws are resolved.

We then see, under the Saving Throw heading:

Quote:

Negates: The spell has no effect on a subject that makes a successful saving throw.

There is a distinction here between "subject is affected" and "spell has an effect on the subject".

And, hey, look what I found, under Creatures, under Area:

Quote:

Many spells affect “living creatures,” which means all creatures other than constructs and undead. Creatures in the spell's area that are not of the appropriate type do not count against the creatures affected.

So if you are categorically immune to a spell, because it affects living creatures and you're not living, you don't count as creatures-affected.

And if making your save counted as making you "not affected", then being immune would too, and they wouldn't have to explicitly state this here. The reasoning doesn't work at all in the other direction; there's no reason to assume that "constructs don't count against a limit on living creatures" implies that creatures that make saves don't count.

[reika michiko]

Lots of theory, no rulings.

Was this never addressed by a faq?

[Matthew Downie]

That 'The Spell's Result' quote seems fairly conclusive. Any creature that has to make a save is 'affected', even if it negates the effect with a save. On that basis, Theory 1 is RAW and no FAQ is needed.

[Sitri]

Made save = not affected. For further proof of this, look at other things that use this language. The first I found was command plantbut I know I have seen others. If just being targeted means being affected, the save is meaningless. Likewise, an augmented mythic polymorph would turn everything it can target within a mile into a small animal without a save.

For that matter, if being targeted means being affected, a creature with a bleed attack just needs to swing at you to make you start bleeding.

[Matthew Downie]

OK, that's a pretty convincing proof. But the quote I referenced 'proves' the opposite. This means that 'affected' is used inconsistently in the rules, RAW is ambiguous, and FAQ (or GM ruling) is needed.

[Sitri]

Well in that post, the first quote is still important in regard to Save=Partial even under the opposite interpretation. Also, trying to write it any other way gets clunky fast. I started to try and write out an alternative that would get this same meaning across but use all terms more precisely and gave up after about one minute of staring at the screen.

As far as redundancy in the last quote, it does seem that way but I am not ultimately convinced. It is not the only instance of redundancy that can be found in the rules, and it could just be added for clarity. EDIT: It is redundant regardless which interpretation you use.

At the least, I saw another instance of suggesting that just making a save is not being affected on that very page. With the save=affected reading, if you make a save (negates) against a damage dealing spell while you are casting, you would not need to make a concentration check, but if you make a save (negates) against a non-damage dealing spell, you would need to make a concentration check. This doesn't make any sense.

[shadowkras]

Quote:

With the save=affected reading, if you make a save (negates) against a damage dealing spell while you are casting, you would not need to make a concentration check, but if you make a save (negates) against a non-damage dealing spell, you would need to make a concentration check.

I always made my players roll concentration when someone tried to cast a spell on them and they were mid-cast (like summoning a monster).

Resisting the spell takes effort (physical or mental) and it should require a concentration check in my opinion.

[Majuba]

"Theory 1" definitely. The slumber comes upon 4 HD of creatures. Whether they make their save or not is irrelevant.

Here's the 3.0 text which was a bit different due to a random number of HD, it's a bit clearer on this point:

3.0-Sleep:

A sleep spell causes a comatose slumber to come upon one or more creatures. Roll 2d4 to determine how many total HD of creatures can be affected. Creatures with the fewest HD are affected first. Among creatures with equal HD, those who are closest to the spell’s point of origin are affected first. No creature with 5 or more HD is affected, and HD that are not sufficient to affect a creature are wasted.

Also, it's worth noting that in 1st (and 2nd?) edition, the spell had no saving throw, so the text (which hasn't changed much) didn't need to reference that.

1.0-Sleep:

Sleep (Enchantment/Charm)
Level: 1 Components: V, S, M Range: 3" + 1"/level Casting Time: 1 segment Duration: 5 rounds/level Saving Throw: None Area of Effect: Special
Explanation/Description: When a magic-user casts a Sleep spell, he or she will usually cause a comatose slumber to come upon one or more creatures [other than undead and certain other creatures specifically excluded (see ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS. MONSTER MANUAL) from the spell's effects]. All creatures to be affected by the Sleep spell must be within a 3" diameter circle. The number of creatures which can be affected is a function of their life energy levels [added emphasis], expressed as hit dice and hit points:
Creatures Hit Dice Number Affected By Sleep Spell
up to 1 4-16 (4d4)
1+1 to 2 2-8 (2d4)
2+1 to 3 1-4 (1d4)
3+1 to 4 1-2 (½d4, round off)
4+1 to 4+4 0-1 (d4, 3 or 4)

The area of effect is determined by the range and area centre decided upon by the spell caster. Slapping or wounding will awaken affected creatures, but noise will not do so. Awakening requires 1 complete melee round. Note that sleeping creatures can be slain automatically at a rate of 1 per slayer per melee round. The material component for this spell is a pinch of fine sand, rose petals, or a live cricket.

[Sitri]

Paizo has said many times that they often depart from the rules of their predecessors and will not be bound by their language or intent, but even if that wasn't the case, I don't see anything in the old spells that helps to clarify this issue.

[thaX]

Since the sleep spell is negated on a successful save, you only count the effected creatures for the HD total. (those that failed)

[seebs]

I am pretty sure the word "affected" is used inconsistently, but it seems pretty clear that you pick targets, subject to HD limits or whatever, and then once you have picked targets, they make saves if saves are available. You don't get to then pick more targets.

The "only count creatures which failed saves" ruling creates huge problems. Imagine that you have a spell which affects up to 3 creatures, will save negates, and you're near 100 creatures with good will saves... Under this ruling, you're guaranteed to get three creatures, but you don't know which one, and you're going to spend hours picking.

I don't buy it.

1. Pick targets.
2. Determine what happens.

You can't pick more targets than your spell can affect.

Sitri wrote:

Likewise, an augmented mythic polymorph would turn everything it can target within a mile into a small animal without a save.

Hmm.

Mythic Polymorph wrote:

Augmented (9th): If you expend four uses of mythic power, the spell affects all other creatures with 8 Hit Dice or fewer in a 1-mile radius. Affected creatures transform into Small or smaller animals appropriate to the local environment. You can select a number of creatures up to your tier to not be affected.

I don't think this text trumps the saving throw, although the previous level of augment does.

[reika michiko]

How often does paizo address faq requests?

[Hayato Ken]

thaX wrote:

Since the sleep spell is negated on a successful save, you only count the effected creatures for the HD total. (those that failed)

Unfortunately, this is not true.

[Sitri]

seebs wrote:

I am pretty sure the word "affected" is used inconsistently, but it seems pretty clear that you pick targets, subject to HD limits or whatever, and then once you have picked targets, they make saves if saves are available. You don't get to then pick more targets.

The "only count creatures which failed saves" ruling creates huge problems. Imagine that you have a spell which affects up to 3 creatures, will save negates, and you're near 100 creatures with good will saves... Under this ruling, you're guaranteed to get three creatures, but you don't know which one, and you're going to spend hours picking.

I don't buy it.

1. Pick targets.
2. Determine what happens.

You can't pick more targets than your spell can affect.

You don't target creatures at all with it. You don't have enough information to. You claim the area and the GM rolls it out until the conditions are satisfied.

If you are going to make up a non-existent spell and condition, lets try it the other way. I have a spell that can affect 100 creatures and there are 150 in the area, you have to take the time to pick out which 100 you want to affect and then the GM has to keep track of which ones you picked. That is nuts! ;)

reika michiko wrote:

How often does paizo address faq requests?

It seems like every few months you will see them (admittedly my sense of time has been known to be a little off) and it isn't uncommon to get several at one time. However, I have never seen a FAQ for anything I have ever marked. I have marked about 5 things including this one.

Hayato Ken wrote:

thaX wrote:

Since the sleep spell is negated on a successful save, you only count the effected creatures for the HD total. (those that failed)

Unfortunately, this is not true.

Uh Huh. :P

[seebs]

"Pick targets" in this case refers to the process of determining what the targets are. The spell rules are pretty crystal clear on that. First determine which creatures are the ones being affected by the spell, then determine what happens to them. Which could be nothing, if they make saves.

[seebs]

Ah-hah! I remember where I saw this question before.

Confusion bomb. Places you "under the effects of a confusion spell". Do you get a save? Paizo says:

Yes.

So that's an explicit-ish ruling that "under the effects of" does not preclude getting to make a save.

[Sitri]

Quote:

Alchemist, Confusion Bomb: Should this discovery require a saving throw?

Yes. The target of the bomb may attempt at a save against the confusion effect (Will negates, using the bomb's DC).

This will be corrected in the next printing of Ultimate Magic.

Meaning, as written.....no.

[reika michiko]

Do PFS DM's have the authority to rule on stuff like this during games?

I always wondered how much leeway PFS dm's have

[Sitri]

Yes and no. If they are unsure, yes. If they are aware of what the real answer is, they can't choose to do otherwise because they don't like it.

[thaX]

Some have, but are not supposed to...

The spell, as mentioned above, effects an area, not individual creatures, so it would keep trying until the limit is met. My previous statement stands.

Since the sleep spell is negated on a successful save, you only count the effected creatures for the HD total. (those that failed)

[seebs]

Sitri wrote:

Quote:

Alchemist, Confusion Bomb: Should this discovery require a saving throw?

Yes. The target of the bomb may attempt at a save against the confusion effect (Will negates, using the bomb's DC).

This will be corrected in the next printing of Ultimate Magic.

Meaning, as written.....no.

Or meaning, as written, "ambiguous or unclear".

I would agree that, if it were up to me, I would personally have interpreted confusion bomb as not allowing a save.

But really, I think this is just another case where the real answer is "Paizo's use of language is inconsistent."

[seebs]

thaX wrote:

Some have, but are not supposed to...

The spell, as mentioned above, effects an area, not individual creatures, so it would keep trying until the limit is met. My previous statement stands.

Since the sleep spell is negated on a successful save, you only count the effected creatures for the HD total. (those that failed)

First, I'm about 90% sure you mean "affected".

Second... How do you reconcile this with the Spells language stating that you determine who is affected by a spell first, and then once you have decided who is affected, you have them roll saves if saves are allowed?

"Once you know which creatures (or objects or areas) are affected, and whether those creatures have made successful saving throws (if any were allowed), you can apply whatever results a spell entails."

This clearly includes creatures that made successful saving throws as "affected" in at least one sense.

Hmm. Come to think of it:

PRD wrote:

Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature's saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

If they "feel a hostile force or a tingle", then the spell has affected them, even if it had no other effects. :)

[Hayato Ken]

Affected by the spell is the reason a creature has to make a saving throw.