Hey guys, I was looking over the rules for the geas/quest spell, and would like some clarification.
Geas/Quest is normally permanent, but the rules stipulate that if the command "involve(s) some open-ended task that the recipient cannot complete through his own actions" then the spell has a limited duration before wearing off.
My question is what is normally considered to fit this category. How would the following examples normally rule?
1. Never eat the meat of a dog. (Is this considered open ended? It's not something you can "complete")
2. Do not return to this kingdom until you have slain a pit fiend (entirely possible, but beyond the scope of most individuals)
Those two scenarios strike me as ambiguous. What should a GM rule those as?
"Never eat the meat of a dog" seems open ended - it can't be completed, so is not suitable for a Geas. (In Pathfinder, at least, if not in Celtic myth.)
"Slay a Pit Fiend" - I'd say that's open ended too because the spell only affects characters with 7 HD or less, in which case they're not going to have the power to complete the task through their own actions. (Technically, they could gain XP until it becomes possible - but trying to do so is a completely open-ended activity.)
I was referring to the true geas spell. Which has no HD limit.
Also, would the need to become strong enough make it open ended? I would assume the spell allows for some agency.
I'd say that the goals have to be specific and achievable with a fairly clear course of action to get to an end state (no "solve world hunger" or "defend this village" tasks). And, of course per the spell, it has to be achievable through their own actions.
"Slay a pit fiend" might be an acceptable Geas for an appropriately-leveled character near the Worldwound or in Cheliax if there is an obvious or suspected source of pit fiends, and getting to them wouldn't be totally self-destructive. It would be less so for a martial character with no magic ability, living in, say, Andoran. The problem with the latter is step 1: find a pit fiend. That may not be clearly achievable through their own actions. Or, per the spell description, the character can satisfy the letter of the quest/geas by hiring someone to summon a pit fiend, and then kill it (or try to).
The GM can allow nuance. If the geas includes "hire people to do X, and then do X", and the character is given resources and/or money to do so, that could be construed as reasonable. Making them come up with the money if they don't have it is another matter.
There's no hard rule. The GM has to apply their judgement. The spell compels the character to a course of action, but if the character is one that could not reasonably meet its terms or would take a lifetime of effort, that's when the spell would start to strain and break on its own (after 1 day/CL).
Hey guys, I was looking over the rules for the geas/quest spell, and would like some clarification.
Geas/Quest is normally permanent, but the rules stipulate that if the command "involve(s) some open-ended task that the recipient cannot complete through his own actions" then the spell has a limited duration before wearing off.
My question is what is normally considered to fit this category. How would the following examples normally rule?
1. Never eat the meat of a dog. (Is this considered open ended? It's not something you can "complete")
2. Do not return to this kingdom until you have slain a pit fiend (entirely possible, but beyond the scope of most individuals)
Those two scenarios strike me as ambiguous. What should a GM rule those as?
IMHO, the first is completely open-ended. As you point out, it can never be completed, even in theory.
The second one I would rule as open-ended unless the recipient has the realistic capacity to find, engage, and solo a pit fiend. Remember, the spell cannot compel "certain death," and the time limit applies if it's not something he can complete "by his own efforts." Similarly, if the person doesn't know where a pit fiend is, the task merely of finding one is open-ended since he could spend the rest of his life looking.
"A task that the recipient cannot complete through his own actions" - in theory anyone could level up and retrain until they're a level 20 Wizard, and virtually no task is completely impossible in a world like that or "would result in certain death".
But forcing someone to do that seems beyond the scope of a level 6 spell with no saving roll. I'd interpret it as meaning tasks you are not currently capable of completing are open ended.
2. Do not return to this kingdom until you have slain a pit fiend (entirely possible, but beyond the scope of most individuals)
Both of these (but especially the one I quoted) are phrased in the negative. I would say that renders them open-ended. "Do not do X" isn't the same thing as "Do Y".
For instance (2) could be completed by simply never coming back to the kingdom. The fact that the possibility always exists to return to the kingdom (having killed a pit fiend) means that it remains open-ended, because as long as someone was alive they could be fulfilling the terms of the geas (not coming back to the kingdom), while refusing to fight a pit fiend (the phrasing doesn't tell them to slay a pit fiend, only to not come back until they have).
Another way to think of it: A statement of the form "Do not do X" permits potentially infinite other actions. Whereas a statement "Do Y" only lets you do one thing. The former is open-ended, the latter is not.
Of course, others may not see it that way.
In a similar vein, I'd also say that any goal that is purely time-based would be open-ended and thus subject to the 1 day/CL limit.
For example "guard this village" is obviously open ended because there is no goal. "Guard this village for three years" may sound like it has a specific goal, but it's still open-ended because the only satisfying condition is time.
"Kill the monster/whatever currently threatening this village" is more appropriate. The goal is now a specific course of action that can be completed.
In a similar vein, I'd also say that any goal that is purely time-based would be open-ended and thus subject to the 1 day/CL limit.
I'd disagree with you there. I think if you said "Guard this village for three years" that is a very specific and closed-ended task. Once three years are up, you no longer have to guard the village. Otherwise, any geas could, arguably, be limited to 1 day/CL (since you could geas someone to do a task that might be within their power but take 3 years to accomplish).
Think of it this way: If the geas were "Travel to Tian Xia and kill [specific person's name]." If the target couldn't teleport or afford to pay for teleportation, that might take them more than 1 day per CL. It might even take them years, depending on how far away they were and what their means were to accomplish the task. But it's still a specific, closed-ended task even if the time exceeds 1 day per CL.
A purely time-based goal is, by its very definition, closed-ended. Now an exception might be made if the time-frame were in excess of a lifespan. For instance, if you geased a typical human to "guard this town for 1,000 years" you'd probably run up against the "inability to complete it" clause and it would revert to 1 day per CL.
|
Normally the "open-ended" clause comes into play when the geas is dependent on the actions of others. Especially when the target has no way to influence those actions. And the wording is very important.
Examples:
- "Guard this abandoned village until all the residents have returned" - if the residents take a count and find out that everyone is back, the spell ends. But if one has taken off on an ocean-crossing voyage the target has no control over when the condition is fulfilled. So for a gaes worded like that the duration clause kicks in from the beginning.
- "Escort all the residents back to their abandoned village" - here, the duration clause doesn't immediately kick in. If one took off to another continent the target can still try to find her and bring her back (since he doesn't have to guard the village).
As Matthew alluded to, this spell is really meant for "GM fiat" usage. If you think that following the gaes will make for a great storyline, then have the target able to make clear progress. Otherwise, just put in some obstacle that simply can't be surmounted by the target's abilities so you can return to your regularly scheduled plot.
Scrapper, I'd think that would be considered open ended as per everyone else's ideas. They seem to have the geas be a way to either force you to do a specific task (slay x, find y) for indeffinite, but geas's that enforce behavior (don't do this, always do this) would be temporary. So yours likely would be temporary.
Also, you don't prevent them from eating when not a slave, just give them additional permission to.
how would the following be viewed? "As long as you work as a slave, you may eat." looking at a triggered condition on a run away slave.
That's not even a a valid geas. A command is an imperative. That's a declarative.
Even if you phrased it as "do not eat unless you work as a slave," that's open-ended, so it would last only one day per level. And it simply requires that I refrain from eating until I've outlasted the spell, but does not command me to work.
I'm still trying to get a handle on Geas or perhaps I'm looking at the wrong effect. Looking to this thread for some guidance on an effect on a slave with it's removal being the challenge to a PC party.
What you need is the spell "Mark of Justice" - despite the name, no justice needs to be involved.
You simply specify a prohibited behavior - like "kill another person", or "run from your owner" - and once the person who had this cast on them breaks that prohibition, they get hit as if by Bestow Curse.
In a similar vein, I'd also say that any goal that is purely time-based would be open-ended and thus subject to the 1 day/CL limit.
For example "guard this village" is obviously open ended because there is no goal. "Guard this village for three years" may sound like it has a specific goal, but it's still open-ended because the only satisfying condition is time.
"Kill the monster/whatever currently threatening this village" is more appropriate. The goal is now a specific course of action that can be completed.
Anything that specifies a set time period is, by definition, not open ended.
]Anything that specifies a set time period is, by definition, not open ended.
"Serve and obey for the next thousand years," has a time period attached but I don't think it would be a fair geas. It's not open ended in duration, but it is open ended in terms of what's expected of you.
]Anything that specifies a set time period is, by definition, not open ended."Serve and obey for the next thousand years," has a time period attached but I don't think it would be a fair geas. It's not open ended in duration, but it is open ended in terms of what's expected of you.
I would allow a daily save for the open-ended expectations, but not for the defined time period.
I.e. I would allow the task, "Defend this tower against all intruders for a thousand years." to be assigned to an outsider, but not a mortal. Specific task with a set duration, within the capabilities of the target.
A Geas I've seen in my group is, "Serve as a willing host for my Possession spell for 1 week, leaving without retaliation after completion of service." A defined time period with no possibility of early completion.
If you want to avoid lots of headaches, Geas -> subquest for the party
- Slain the monster in the cave near the lake.
- Help defend the village against the orc army that is coming.
- Recover an ancient artifact near the temple ruins over the cliff.
Geas is usually a task, not a sort of 'lines of codes' that the player has to follow, specially when you have other spells that can be used for the desired purpose.
To me 1 and 2 are open ended.