Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range touch
Target one living creature
Duration instantiations
Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance yes
You teleport the target to a space you can see within 30 feet of the target. The destination must be on solid ground, and the teleportation cannot end in a space that is by nature hazardous to the creature you are teleporting.
I was wondering if this spell can be used on a party member with out them having to make a will save. This isn't PFS.
It seems like a great spell to teleport someone out of combat or to a better spot in combat.
edit: I just realized that by RAW, the answer is NO. I should have posted this in Advice. Would any of the GMs here allow this as a will save(harmless)?
** spoiler omitted **
I was wondering if this spell can be used on a party member with out them having to make a will save. This isn't PFS.
It seems like a great spell to teleport someone out of combat or to a better spot in combat.edit: I just realized that by RAW, the answer is NO. I should have posted this in Advice. Would any of the GMs here allow this as a will save(harmless)?
"Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw: A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell's result. Even a character with a special resistance to magic can suppress this quality."
Actually by RAW the answer is YES. Why did you think otherwise?
Because I didn't read the book and this spell save says Will. Others are specific and say Will (harmless).
If a character can willingly accept a spells result, why are some spells listed as requiring a save but having "harmless" after it?
Maybe it's because most people don't know about the voluntarily giving up the save so harmless is put in there.
Even if you didn't come up with that fair ruling, I would have expected my GM to let the will save pass. But it is nice to know that there is yet more of the book that my skimming has missed!
Because Harmless spells never have a harmful effect (with the exception of Cure spells on Undead, since the game kind of assumes you're alive), while spells that are not Harmless may have a negative effect on the target (Enlarge person is Fort negates, but not Harmless for instance).
This spell can be both advantageous and disadvantageous, and so is not Harmless.
Because I didn't read the book and this spell save says Will. Others are specific and say Will (harmless).
If a character can willingly accept a spells result, why are some spells listed as requiring a save but having "harmless" after it?
Maybe it's because most people don't know about the voluntarily giving up the save so harmless is put in there.
Even if you didn't come up with that fair ruling, I would have expected my GM to let the will save pass. But it is nice to know that there is yet more of the book that my skimming has missed!
(Harmless) is useful for when a creature is unaware of the effect, like an unconscious PC for example. It sets whether or not the creature saves by default, so a dying creature won't start resisting heal spells but also won't auto-fail saves against horrific status effects. Occasionally, a creature might not want a spell effect applied to it despite being harmless. I can think of 2 (very situational) examples offhand.
a)Protection/Evil or similar on a mentally controlled PC with the appropriate ordersb)Slapping crappy buffs on a creature so it is "lit up" under Arcane Sight or Detect Magic
It also stops cute shenanigans like giving falsely labled potions of harmful effects to trick creatures into intentionally failing their saves. All the creature has to do is not declare whether or not it saves, and then by default it only accepts if the effect is harmless - no controling a creature with a potion of love by handing it a "CLW potion".
Because Harmless spells never have a harmful effect (with the exception of Cure spells on Undead, since the game kind of assumes you're alive), while spells that are not Harmless may have a negative effect on the target (Enlarge person is Fort negates, but not Harmless for instance).
This spell can be both advantageous and disadvantageous, and so is not Harmless.
It can be a straight debuff for some creatures/builds.
Imagine a dex-to-damage mouser swashbuckler. They would HATE being medium sized and taking a -2 to dex and a -1 to AC and attack rolls. They don't even get the benefits of increased reach that a medium to large size change would bring.
|
A space that is "by nature hazardous to the creature you are teleporting" is a location that will damage or put in danger the creature regardless of creature actions, like a fire, water if the target doesn't breathe water, in mid-air, etc.
Note that the original trick has a problem: "Spell Resistance yes".
A creature can voluntarily lower its spell resistance.
Doing so is a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Once a creature lowers its resistance, it remains down until the creature’s next turn.
So, if the ally has SR it become less useful.
A space that is "by nature hazardous to the creature you are teleporting" is a location that will damage or put in danger the creature regardless of creature actions, like a fire, water if the target doesn't breathe water, in mid-air, etc.
Agreed. A threatened square may be hazardous, but not "by nature".