Does that shut down work? Leashed Shackle is an entangle effect, and cannot be attacked or directly escaped from. Would the spell work at all?
Options that I see are
1) The target is not entangled, but is still restricted to the 30 feet limitation
2) The target is entangled and the spell works as normal
3) The spell cannot keep hold of the target and the shackle slides off
Arguments for options
1) Makes sense - still free to move about despite impedance, and does not prevent spell from working
2) Not really likely, however freedom of movement does not specify any entangle effects. RAW vs RAI probably means no though.
3) Possible, but given that there is no potential for an escape artist check I find it very unlikely.
Thoughts?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement
If you're restricted to a 30ft radius of movement, you're not "moving normally".
If you have the entangled condition, you're not "attacking normally".FoM lets you move normally and attack normally.
RAW vs RAI probably means no though
Reading both spells, I don't see a written vs intent argument anywhere. W and I both side with your first #3, FoM trumping the shackles.
Most likely you are correct. The question is, how far does freedom of movement stretch. Would it stop say - Icy Prison? Forcecage?
The description of entangled is that it does impede movement, so that does make sense that option 2 for leashed shackle is wrong and icy prison would fail. I think however, that the impediment to progress caused by the leash point or the cage may still work.
Type in Freedom of Movement in the search option under the Rules forum. Have a snack, some eye drops, and something to drink ready. You're in for some reading.
Most likely you are correct. The question is, how far does freedom of movement stretch. Would it stop say - Icy Prison? Forcecage?
Force cage is a cage, not a movement limiting effect. Freedom of movement doesn't say you get to walk through walls or ignore things that would normally limit your movement. It just prevents effects that would slow or impede your movement when you normally could move.
Icy prison states you become helpless. That means you cannot move or take actions. Again, FoM doesn't protect you from being helpless, it just protects your movement from being impeded when normal actions would be allowed. I could see a GM ruling either way on this one though.
Personally, as you normally cannot move when entrapped in an ice block, I'd rule FoM doesn't work if you fail the save. If you made it, FoM would kick in.
The reasons for allowing the spell to trump FoM being, you are encapsulated in ice which is what keeps your movement from being normal. It isn't a spell effect blocking your movement, it is the physical ice that was created by the spell and is surrounding you or parts of your body which are hindering and continuing to damage you. If you have ice blocks encasing your limbs, you are unable to function normally or move freely. It isn't paralysis, or some magical effect that is hindering you, but actual physical limitations that the spell doesn't remove or prevent.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The reasons for allowing the spell to trump FoM being, you are encapsulated in ice which is what keeps your movement from being normal. It isn't a spell effect blocking you movement, it is the physical ice that was created by the spell and is surrounding you or parts of your body which are hindering and continuing to damage you. If you have ice blocks encasing your limbs, you are unable to function normally or move freely. It isn't paralysis, or some magical effect that is hindering you, but actual physical limitations that the spell doesn't remove or prevent.
To play devil's advocate here, the same argument could be made about the massive mouth of a colossal creature who was trying to swallow you, except FoM does keep that from happening. What's the difference between "surrounded by physical ice" and "surrounded by physical flesh"?
The reasons for allowing the spell to trump FoM being, you are encapsulated in ice which is what keeps your movement from being normal. It isn't a spell effect blocking you movement, it is the physical ice that was created by the spell and is surrounding you or parts of your body which are hindering and continuing to damage you. If you have ice blocks encasing your limbs, you are unable to function normally or move freely. It isn't paralysis, or some magical effect that is hindering you, but actual physical limitations that the spell doesn't remove or prevent.To play devil's advocate here, the same argument could be made about the massive mouth of a colossal creature who was trying to swallow you, except FoM does keep that from happening. What's the difference between "surrounded by physical ice" and "surrounded by physical flesh"?
The spell states the maneuver is failed in such a case? Swallowing requires a grapple check.
Obviously it is one of those "situation by situation" spells, but it specifically states combat maneuvers will fail. When it comes to spells, it is much less specific, protecting you from paralysis, slows, etc. Helpless by instantaneous ice block prison isn't the same as Hold Person. One is an ongoing magical effect limiting your movement, the other is a physical limitation from materials created by magic. The spell states the exceptions and what it allows, so when something would fall outside the exception list we would go to check what is "normal" to determine if it is allowed. FoM protects your "right" to move, but it doesn't alter it in anyway beyond what is stated. You could move through a Solid Fog at your normal speed, but if it was cast over an area that was difficult terrain, you would still be unable to run through it.
On the whole, I feel that I am going to house rule that any substance as viscous, or more viscous, as peanut butter is the limit for freedom of movement.
Icy Prison will fail because it is the act of entangling the individual that makes the target helpless.
If someone were to say - polymorph the air around the target into window putty, I would say that FOM would be worthless. A prevention of movement such as a barrier would be equally effective.
...
If someone were to say - polymorph the air around the target into window putty, I would say that FOM would be worthless...
"This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog , slow, and web."
yes, you have a point. My argument is as follows.
1) As with a golem, the direct magical creation of a purely magical impediment will fail. e.g. solid fog.
2) The transmutation of a non magical surrounding into a non magical surrounding cannot be prevented.
3) Provided the surrounding prevents passage rather than impeding movement FOM does not apply.
Yes, I know that. That was part of the basis of my argument.
Are you arguing intent or RAW? RAW the difference is we have specific exceptions written out.
Intent is.... well anyone's guess, we didn't write the rules nor do we know how any/all of them changed from 3.5 to PFRPG even though they might have been copy/pasted.
On the whole, I feel that I am going to house rule that any substance as viscous, or more viscous, as peanut butter is the limit for freedom of movement.
Icy Prison will fail because it is the act of entangling the individual that makes the target helpless.
If someone were to say - polymorph the air around the target into window putty, I would say that FOM would be worthless. A prevention of movement such as a barrier would be equally effective.
Icy prison only entangles on a failed save, otherwise you still have 'helpless' which is not 'paralyzed' even though 'paralyzed' makes you 'helpless'. That is why I would treat it like evasion, if you failed you are encased in ice, if you made it you are entangled which is something that FoM explicitly states it does protect against.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Intent is.... well anyone's guess, we didn't write the rules nor do we know how any/all of them changed from 3.5 to PFRPG even though they might have been copy/pasted.
Kudos on acknowledging this. That puts you far ahead of a great many grognards veteran players.
As for this:
Are you arguing intent or RAW? RAW the difference is we have specific exceptions written out.
What is explicitly written in the spell is that it protects against [category], even [examples].
Rules-as-written (which is what "RAW" allegedly stands for) is that FoM protects against MORE than the specific examples given. To put it another way, if you only let FoM protect against the examples given, that would actually be in contradiction to the written rules.
It is "RAW" that FoM protects against more things than it specifically lists.
Therefore, any competent interpretation uses the examples in the manner in which they were written: as examples.
It protects against grapples, therefore "magical vs physical" is provably NOT the dividing line.
It protects against paralysis, therefore "helpless vs merely impeded" is provably NOT the dividing line.
So far, as I understand it, the arguments presented regarding icy prison have been "it doesn't work because it's a physical barrier" and "it doesn't work because 'helpless' is not a protected condition". If the former were true, then FoM wouldn't work against grapples, but it does, so that argument is wrong. If the latter were true, then FoM wouldn't work against paralysis, but it does, so that argument is wrong too.
Now, this doesn't prove the FoM does work against I.P, it just rules out the arguments of "because physical" and "because helpless".
I still don't know what I think the answer is with I.P., but the "RAW" has eliminated two theories so far, which helps narrow it down. :)
It protects against grapples, therefore "magical vs physical" is provably NOT the dividing line.
So far, as I understand it, the arguments presented regarding icy prison have been "it doesn't work because it's a physical barrier" and "it doesn't work because 'helpless' is not a protected condition". If the former were true, then FoM wouldn't work against grapples, but it does, so that argument is wrong. If the latter were true, then FoM wouldn't work against paralysis, but it does, so that argument is wrong
Going to have to disagree with you that a grapple is a physical barrier. Not saying that it isn't physical, just that it isn't a proper barrier. I would consider a barrier to be a wall or some sort of significant blockage. Unless you have been swallowed by some sort of animate mountain, I wouldn't consider any combat maneuver that significant.
I do appreciate the opinions. I am looking at builds and trying to see how a GM could counter them. This is a very powerful ability and I like it. Thus if I know how to counter it...
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Not saying that it isn't physical, just that it isn't a proper barrier. I would consider a barrier to be a wall or some sort of significant blockage.
That's why earlier I brought up being swallowed by a colossal creature: that's a 30ft space and 30ft reach. We're talking something capable of swallowing a woolly mammoth whole.
When it goes to try and swallow my poor human self, its mouth is going to completely surround me. I don't have limbs sticking out, there are no gaps, etc. Everywhere, 360 degrees on every axis, there is a wall of flesh and bone.
And FoM makes me immune.
Same with a gelatinous cube's engulf ability, which it would be pretty hard to argue is meaningfully different from icy prison.
Hah! I love it! Yes it is indeed ridiculous. However, it is remotely conceivable to escape from such a situation. And look at it this way - there are always two possible exits. I know I know that was offal... er awful.
I agree with Skylacer's interpretation. Make the save, you're entangled and unaffected by it. Fail the save you are helpless and inside a block of ice. Helpless is not prevented by freedom of movement, no more than freedom of movement would allow you to move whilst daze, nor would it let you walk through a wall of stone.
Thank you sir that makes a great deal of sense. I misread the spell the first time.
My dividing line on FoM is if it targets you, FoM negates it. The only thing FoM wont negate, to me, is solid, obstructions not targeted at the player or creating effects that target the player(black tentacles), aka anything you would need earth glide to get through. So FoM wont beat Wall of Stone for example, but would beat Icy Prison.
Brilliant. That is the line I was trying to draw. Earth glide is key here. Puts that boundary down and makes sense. Brings back the original question though. The leashed shackle. Clearly it cannot entangle the victim. That has been made abundantly clear. Can it restrict to a region of movement 30 ft in radius?
Based on posts so far I feel the consensus is no - the shackle cannot grip in the first place. However, FOM does not counter the spell, and the shackle itself (made of solid force) does not entangle - the chain does. So: is the entangled condition removed but the limit to distance enforced or not?Personal opinion - 30 ft radius enforced, no entangle. But I could certainly be convinced otherwise.
|
You could move through a Solid Fog at your normal speed, but if it was cast over an area that was difficult terrain, you would still be unable to run through it.
FoM let's you move normally through difficult terrain (whether mundane or magical), so you certainly can run or charge through difficult terrain when affected by FoM.
What seems to surprise people is just how powerful this spell is. It's a 4th level spell, and has all the lower of a 4th level spell designed to prevent situational nerfs.
You could move through a Solid Fog at your normal speed, but if it was cast over an area that was difficult terrain, you would still be unable to run through it.FoM let's you move normally through difficult terrain (whether mundane or magical), so you certainly can run or charge through difficult terrain when affected by FoM.
What seems to surprise people is just how powerful this spell is. It's a 4th level spell, and has all the lower of a 4th level spell designed to prevent situational nerfs.
Unless there is some sort of errata or FAQ I haven't run across, you are completely incorrect in regards to difficult terrain.
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web. All combat maneuver checks made to grapple the target automatically fail. The subject automatically succeeds on any combat maneuver checks and Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin.The spell also allows the subject to move and attack normally while underwater, even with slashing weapons such as axes and swords or with bludgeoning weapons such as flails, hammers, and maces, provided that the weapon is wielded in the hand rather than hurled. The freedom of movement spell does not, however, grant water breathing.
There is absolutely no indication that it prevents mundane terrain from being "difficult" anywhere in the spell write up.
|
|
Difficult Terrain: Difficult terrain, such as heavy undergrowth, broken ground, or steep stairs, hampers movement. Each square of difficult terrain counts as 2 squares of movement. Each diagonal move into a difficult terrain square counts as 3 squares. You can't run or charge across difficult terrain.
If you occupy squares with different kinds of terrain, you can move only as fast as the most difficult terrain you occupy will allow.
Flying and incorporeal creatures are not hampered by difficult terrain.
Difficult terrain hampers movement. If your movement is not hampered, then it is not difficult terrain for you.
FoM means that your movement is not hampered.
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell
'Normal movement' is one square costs 5-feet of your movement. Hampered movement is worse than that. FoM prevents your movement from being worse, therefore your movement is not hampered.
You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles).
So if difficult terrain does not hamper your movement, then you can charge across it.
Difficult Terrain: Difficult terrain, such as heavy undergrowth, broken ground, or steep stairs, hampers movement. Each square of difficult terrain counts as 2 squares of movement. Each diagonal move into a difficult terrain square counts as 3 squares. You can't run or charge across difficult terrain.
If you occupy squares with different kinds of terrain, you can move only as fast as the most difficult terrain you occupy will allow.
Flying and incorporeal creatures are not hampered by difficult terrain.
Difficult terrain hampers movement. If your movement is not hampered, then it is not difficult terrain for you.
FoM means that your movement is not hampered.
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell'Normal movement' is one square costs 5-feet of your movement. Hampered movement is worse than that. FoM prevents your movement from being worse, therefore your movement is not hampered.
You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles).So if difficult terrain does not hamper your movement, then you can charge across it.
Umm, you are really really stretching it now. "Normal" movement through difficult terrain in is still normal. It isn't magically altered or adjusted beyond what is normal. Do you have some FAQ or post indicating it breaks the normal rules of movement in the way you are suggesting?
|
|
Another common misunderstanding of this spell is that it is restricted to countering magical impediments. This is not the case:-
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement
Two things to note:-
• the 'even' means that you can move (and attack) normally, not only when mundane conditions impede you, but even when magic impedes your movement!
• it prevents magical or non-magical conditions that 'impede movement', like....difficult terrain, for example
Create pit. Stone shape. Clashing rocks. Hell, physically dropping a shrink item'd adamantine box on the subject. Bottom line: FoM needs an overhaul. How it works now is anyone's guess.
Another common misunderstanding of this spell is that it is restricted to countering magical impediments. This is not the case:-
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movementTwo things to note:-
• the 'even' means that you can move (and attack) normally, not only when mundane conditions impede you, but even when magic impedes your movement!
• it prevents magical or non-magical conditions that 'impede movement', like....difficult terrain, for example
I'm just going to say, your views are on the far outskirts of what anyone would realistically rule at this point. Thanks for your input, but I disagree and believe you have a very flawed view of the rules.
If you have something concrete to back your stance on it, other than word play and loosely tossing random possibilities at a board to see what sticks, I'd be happy to continue a discussion. At this point you haven't provided errata or FAQs to back your rather "wild" claims in regards to the subject at hand. Especially given the lack of wording to the effect of what you are suggesting.
The spell states what it does, it doesn't state it does what you are saying it does however.
Freedom of Movement states that it allows you to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell. You could make a case that, RAW, it temporarily cures the dead condition. Whether it works on difficult terrain, paralyzing poison, and so forth, has been debated for years in past without any conclusive arguments provided by either side.
The idea that it is effective against difficult terrain is quite common and not "on the far outskirts of what anyone would realistically rule".
Freedom of Movement states that it allows you to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell. You could make a case that, RAW, it temporarily cures the dead condition. Whether it works on difficult terrain, paralyzing poison, and so forth, has been debated for years in past without any conclusive arguments provided by either side.
The idea that it is effective against difficult terrain is quite common and not "on the far outskirts of what anyone would realistically rule".
Again, I will disagree given the wording of the spell. Normal is normal, as in the "normal" rules apply given no explicit exemptions or exceptions as we are dealing with an "exception based" rule system. If you can supply errata or FAQs in support of the spell countering difficult terrain that isn't altered magically, naturally occurring difficult terrain, or any number of other "normal" situations that would occur that aren't specifically stated to be otherwise altered in the spell that text I would be happy to discuss those.
Otherwise it is right up there with the rather ridiculous notion that walls are impediments to movement and so the spell allows you to bypass them. It doesn't take much in the way of imagination or intelligence to come up with tangential cases and link them together to justify what you think should happen. Those same links can be pushed to unreasonable lengths because we want something to work a certain way because of wording vagueness that might have been intended to NOT overly limit the spells effects.
As this is the rules forum I'd like to keep to what the spell says, not put things in the writers mouth or "read into" it too much. I'm not saying it is impossible, but I am definitely saying it takes some "creative thinking" and leaps of "logic" to get from the words on the page start, to where some of the suggestions we've just heard are.
|
|
Tactical, for combat, measured in feet (or 5-foot squares) per round.
This establishes 'normal' movement. As opposed to 'hampered' movement.
Hampered Movement: Difficult terrain, obstacles, and poor visibility can hamper movement (see Table: Hampered Movement for details). When movement is hampered, each square moved into usually counts as two squares, effectively reducing the distance that a character can cover in a move.
The actual effect of your movement being hampered is that it costs more of your movement than 'normal' to move from square to square.
In some situations, your movement may be so hampered that you don't have sufficient speed even to move 5 feet (1 square). In such a case, you may use a full-round action to move 5 feet (1 square) in any direction, even diagonally. Even though this looks like a 5-foot step, it's not, and thus it provokes attacks of opportunity normally. (You can't take advantage of this rule to move through impassable terrain or to move when all movement is prohibited to you.)
These various reductions in movement are solved by FoM. If you are able to move at all, then FoM let's you move at your normal, unhampered rate from square to square. What FoM does not do is let you move into a square that doesn't allow entry, such as solid rock or through walls. Does it let you slide between closely-set bars? It depends. If the bars are too narrow for you, FoM does not make them passable. However, if they are set so that it is possible for you to squeeze through, then FoM allows you to move through them at your full normal move rate. You could even run through them! This is a 4th level spell after all! Check out other 4th level spells to see what they can do!
You can't run or charge through any square that would hamper your movement.
.....and therefore you can run or charge through any square that would not hamper your movement!
Just to be clear, 'hamper', 'hinder' and 'impede' are synonyms. They mean the same thing in this context.
What does FoM do to things that impede your movement?
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement