Hi all,
So I've been playing a Dirge Bard in a heavily gothic, undead-heavy campaign and having a lot of fun with it. My dirge bard is enchantment-focused and loves to play all sorts of mind games with the undead you can't normally do. Great archetype, by the way.
So here's the question. After reading spell description I notice that Cacophonous Call is a WILL SAVE, not fort.
Does this mean a dirge bard (which can cast mind-affecting spells on undead) can nauseate an undead since it is will, not fort?
Thanks!
What type of saving throw is required is irrelevant. Mind-affecting is a specific type of spell that can be found in the spell's page and the spell in question does happen to be a mind-affecting spell so yes it would affect them for THAT reason, not because it's a will save (although that is generally the save a mind-affecting spell calls for, you need to keep your reasoning clear)
Barfing skeletons? That's what I call dry heaving!
/performance check made.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
making-half-dragons wrote: What type of saving throw is required is irrelevant. Mind-affecting is a specific type of spell that can be found in the spell's page and the spell in question does happen to be a mind-affecting spell so yes it would affect them for THAT reason, not because it's a will save (although that is generally the save a mind-affecting spell calls for, you need to keep your reasoning clear) Cacophonous Call is a mind affecting spell. Most spells that give the nauseated condition require fortitude saves. Undead are immune to both mind affecting spells and those that require a fortitude save unless the spell affects items. So yes a Dirge Bard can use Cacophonous Call on undead.
they could use it it just wouldnt effect a majority of undead no innards= cant be nausiated
Undead have a lot of listed immunities. Immune to the nauseated condition is not one of them.
Lady-J wrote: they could use it it just wouldnt effect a majority of undead no innards= cant be nausiated Those also cover such effects as pain though, don't they? Sickened and nausea?
Cavall wrote: Lady-J wrote: they could use it it just wouldnt effect a majority of undead no innards= cant be nausiated Those also cover such effects as pain though, don't they? Sickened and nausea? you can be sickend and nausious with out feeling pain you just need innards cuz both of those condisions just make you wana puke to various degrees wich something without innards cannot do so while it could work on say a vampire it would not work on a skeleton or a ghost
What I'm saying is that the conditions cover both vomiting from nausea and also pain as well.
So unless it saying immunity to the ability it would still work.
Lady-J wrote: Cavall wrote: Lady-J wrote: they could use it it just wouldnt effect a majority of undead no innards= cant be nausiated Those also cover such effects as pain though, don't they? Sickened and nausea? you can be sickend and nausious with out feeling pain you just need innards cuz both of those condisions just make you wana puke to various degrees wich something without innards cannot do so while it could work on say a vampire it would not work on a skeleton or a ghost Having innards is in no way a prerequisite for being subject to the nauseated condition. Elementals aren't immune to the nauseated condition, nor are oozes.
_Ozy_ wrote: Lady-J wrote: Cavall wrote: Lady-J wrote: they could use it it just wouldnt effect a majority of undead no innards= cant be nausiated Those also cover such effects as pain though, don't they? Sickened and nausea? you can be sickend and nausious with out feeling pain you just need innards cuz both of those condisions just make you wana puke to various degrees wich something without innards cannot do so while it could work on say a vampire it would not work on a skeleton or a ghost Having innards is in no way a prerequisite for being subject to the nauseated condition. Elementals aren't immune to the nauseated condition, nor are oozes. well you cant puke if you dont have a stomac so you cant be nausiated saying otherwise would be like saying you can get brain freeze when the creature physically has no brain
The 'stomach distress' part of nauseated shouldn't be taken literally, only the mechanical effect listed as part of the condition. Otherwise there would be an indication that creatures with abnormal physiology are immune to nauseated, and yet that isn't actually the case anywhere in the Pathfinder rules.
Unless the creature traits say that they are immune to the nauseated condition, they are not immune to the nauseated condition. Now, much of the time the nauseated condition will be imposed by some sort of poison or fortitude effect, that will not affect creatures immune to poison, fortitude saves, etc... But if the nauseated effect is through some special magical influence, then those monsters will be affected...because magic.
would a creature with no arms then be suseptible to a spell which on a failed will save causes their arms to fall off simple because they dont have immunity to their arms falling of no because its naturally implyed that it wouldnt work
Yes, you can have nauseated undead with that spell.
You can have nauseated, sickened, shaken or panicked undead for that matter, if you find a way to apply those conditions.
Lady-J wrote: would a creature with no arms then be suseptible to a spell which on a failed will save causes their arms to fall off simple because they dont have immunity to their arms falling of no because its naturally implyed that it wouldnt work Nauseated is just a condition. In game mechanics terms, it's the condition of having only a move action to use each turn.
A dirge bard can override the immunity to mind-affecting spells. Period. So if it's a mind affecting spell and it applies the Nauseated condition, the bard can give it.
If you need a visual, imagine the undead remembering what it was to be Nauseated in life and feeling that way in death.
Mechanically, it just means they're restricted to a move action.
Lady-J wrote: would a creature with no arms then be suseptible to a spell which on a failed will save causes their arms to fall off simple because they dont have immunity to their arms falling of no because its naturally implyed that it wouldnt work If there were a condition in Pathfinder called 'armless' that imposed certain penalties, one would expect armless creatures to already have these penalties, no?
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
