I asked this question on reddit and was directed here by a friendly poster in the hope of an offical answer as it seems to be not that simple a question, and has lots of good RAW vs RAI arguments...
My group managed to capture some prisoners a few sessions ago and my cleric decided to use a 4th level spell slot to cast status(heightened) on them, and a couple of party members. Reasoning that as we are in deep jungle it's gonna take a while to take the prisoners back to civilization, and knowing where they are at all times will stop them escaping to far if they decide to run for it. This should then stop the more murder hobo'y members of the party using this as an excuse to just kill the prisoners. This has meant I have read the spell (and the bits around the spell) in more detail and now have a question that I don't think has been asked anywhere yet.
Status states that you know the conditions affecting a creature, and in the rulebook under conditions it also states that being hidden and detected are conditions (and as far as I can tell if it's a condition on the conditions list then it technically affects a creature when it's applied to them).
Does this mean that I can tell if any of the party members (or prisoners) that I have cast the spell on have become detected or have failed to be hidden ? This could be pretty powerful in many situations, but doesn't really make any sense. This would also suggest I can tell if someone has gone prone even if I can't see them, and a couple of other janky things. I think I must have miss-read something somewhere but can't find what
It does appear to be pretty vague.
There are groups of conditions, to which I would probably only think the "Death and Dying" and "Lowered Abilities" groups would be relevant here.
But you are correct that the spell just mentions "conditions", without any further explanation.
The spell can only be cast on willing creatures, so I wouldn't think prisoners could be targeted.
The heightened version just targets up to 10 Creatures. It doesn't have the willing or living restrictions of the base version.
I see no reason to consider it "janky" that the status spell do exactly what it says it does.
It's doesn't make any more or less sense for the spell to inform you of one condition but not another, as there's no explanation beyond "is magic" for how the knowledge you are gaining is gained. It's not like there's text suggesting you're tapping into their life force to get a read on them which would suggest you could tell if they had been blinded or were dying but not that they were prone or flat-footed.
As for power level of knowing when certain conditions are applying... you don't have any inherent means to communicate to them, so trying to use the spell to check for hidden status for example, what are you going to do if they aren't, shout a warning that gives your position away too? It's not likely that a scenario will be more drastically affected by this spell than is appropriate for a 2nd-level spell.
I guess I just figured it was 'supposed' to work as similar spells do in other editions but I guess it's supposed to be able detect all conditions.
It's just gonna mean I can do things like warn the rogue that they failed to hide from the big bad with there last action on their turn so they won't get sneak attack on there first attack next turn, so hide again or get flat footed some other way before attacking.
I can also spot an ambush because the party will suddenly gain the observed and flat-footed conditions!
Also I had a stupid shower thought as a result of this. If my character and another learnt Morse code or something similar we could communicate infinite distance by them going prone and standing up , one way though, unless both of us learn status. Probably not something I would pull in a real game though. Although could be a good secret signal, if there's something wrong and you need a cleric stand up and lie down lots!
So you could offer to cast it on an NPC. It's harmless so they should accept it if an ally. Since Attitudes are Conditions, then you'll know how they feel about you, meaning Hostile & Unfriendly NPCs (who know the spell) won't want to accept it...outing themselves if undercover.
Seems a bit too far for that spell. It's also awkward that PCs don't have Attitude Conditions, a lack which in-game would be puzzling.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
thenobledrake wrote: I see no reason to consider it "janky" that the status spell do exactly what it says it does.
It's doesn't make any more or less sense for the spell to inform you of one condition but not another, as there's no explanation beyond "is magic" for how the knowledge you are gaining is gained. It's not like there's text suggesting you're tapping into their life force to get a read on them which would suggest you could tell if they had been blinded or were dying but not that they were prone or flat-footed.
As for power level of knowing when certain conditions are applying... you don't have any inherent means to communicate to them, so trying to use the spell to check for hidden status for example, what are you going to do if they aren't, shout a warning that gives your position away too? It's not likely that a scenario will be more drastically affected by this spell than is appropriate for a 2nd-level spell.
"As long as you and the target are on the same plane of existence and both alive, you remain aware of its present state. You know the target's direction from you, distance from you, and any conditions affecting it."
It must be a condition affecting you. If you are Hidden to someone no condition affects you so for me it's not valid.
SuperBidi wrote:
It must be a condition affecting you. If you are Hidden to someone no condition affects you so for me it's not valid.
The language used in the hidden condition makes it a condition which you have, not a condition that someone trying to observe you has.
You "become hidden" - rather than apply it to other creatures.
The Wibble wrote: It's just gonna mean I can do things like warn the rogue that they failed to hide from the big bad with there last action on their turn so they won't get sneak attack on there first attack next turn, so hide again or get flat footed some other way before attacking. True, but shouting "Hey Rogue, you're not hidden yet." isn't just the upside of the Rogue knowing they should try again - it's also the downside of revealing the plan to the enemy if they understand what you said. They might be able to prevent to Rogue from trying again so easily by moving, or might elect to try and take the sneaky bugger out of the fight.
The Wibble" wrote: I can also spot an ambush because the party will suddenly gain the observed and flat-footed conditions! If your GM is running ambushes by the book, you'll probably already be in encounter mode before this happens so shouting "it's an ambush" as soon as you know it is won't be much different from the result of whoever gets spotted and attacked first shouting the same thing.
The Wibble wrote: Also I had a stupid shower thought as a result of this. If my character and another learnt Morse code or something similar we could communicate infinite distance by them going prone and standing up , one way though, unless both of us learn status. Probably not something I would pull in a real game though. Although could be a good secret signal, if there's something wrong and you need a cleric stand up and lie down lots! Now this one is genuinely some nice out of the box thinking! Hard to say what kind of scenarios it would be truly useful in given the slow speed of communication (rough estimate 7 rounds for "s o s"), but an interesting tool to have in the kit for sure.
Castilliano wrote: It's also awkward that PCs don't have Attitude Conditions, a lack which in-game would be puzzling. One of the many reasons that no one should try to treat game rules as being the in-world laws of physics or the like. PCs don't lack the attitude conditions because they can't be described as occasionally unfriendly or hostile or whatever in-character - they lack them because each has mechanical traits that the game system elects to have PCs exempt to so that PVP griefing via social skills can't be a thing.
thenobledrake wrote: SuperBidi wrote:
It must be a condition affecting you. If you are Hidden to someone no condition affects you so for me it's not valid.
The language used in the hidden condition makes it a condition which you have, not a condition that someone trying to observe you has.
You "become hidden" - rather than apply it to other creatures. Let's take an example: If the target gets Sickened 2 for a minute, what would you tell to the caster? That the target is Sickened 2 for a minute, that the target is Sickened 2 or that the target is Sickened?
thenobledrake wrote: SuperBidi wrote:
It must be a condition affecting you. If you are Hidden to someone no condition affects you so for me it's not valid.
The language used in the hidden condition makes it a condition which you have, not a condition that someone trying to observe you has.
You "become hidden" - rather than apply it to other creatures.
The problem with that is that the hidden condition is entirely relative to the creature observing the target. The target of status might be simultaneously undetected, unnoticed, hidden, concealed and observed all based on how other creatures sense them (including their own party members).
The "Relative" Groups:
-Degrees of Detection
-Senses
-Attitudes
The "Absolute" Groups:
-Death and Dying
-Lowered Abilities
I agree with Nefreet above. Should only give information on the latter subsets.
SuperBidi wrote: Let's take an example: If the target gets Sickened 2 for a minute, what would you tell to the caster? That the target is Sickened 2 for a minute, that the target is Sickened 2 or that the target is Sickened? Not sure how this is relevant to the hidden condtion, but... the spell says the caster knows any conditions affecting the target. It does not say the value, or the duration. So the caster knows the target is Sickened and that is basically it.
Alyran wrote: The problem with that is that the hidden condition is entirely relative to the creature observing the target. I don't think that's actually relevant though. While you are right that being observed by your own party members won't be differentiated from being observed by others, further adding to my claim that this spell's effects aren't actually all that potent in practical scenarios, it can still be useful to know that your rogue ally is observed and concealed vs. observed and hidden.
You won't know who/what each of those conditions is relative to without other information, but there's no reason to believe that the spell doesn't communicate those conditions at all. The spell is not so powerful as to need to be reigned in via unfavorable reading.
thenobledrake wrote: SuperBidi wrote: Let's take an example: If the target gets Sickened 2 for a minute, what would you tell to the caster? That the target is Sickened 2 for a minute, that the target is Sickened 2 or that the target is Sickened? Not sure how this is relevant to the hidden condtion, but... the spell says the caster knows any conditions affecting the target. It does not say the value, or the duration. So the caster knows the target is Sickened and that is basically it. It is relevant because you are always and at the same time Unnoticed, Undetected, Hidden and Observed by various creatures (if you include insects and party members). So, if it doesn't give more information about the statuses (what creature gives you such status or quantity of creatures giving you such status) you can ignore these kind of statuses as you are always affected by them.
rainzax wrote: The "Relative" Groups:
-Degrees of Detection
-Senses
-Attitudes
The "Absolute" Groups:
-Death and Dying
-Lowered Abilities
I agree with Nefreet above. Should only give information on the latter subsets.
What about confused, controlled, doomed, paralyzed, petrified, unconscious, wounded, poisoned, diseased, or on fire? If they don't cause Ability Penalties, none of those fall into either of those "Absolute Groups", but would certainly be things the Spell would disclose.
I would agree as well.
I disagree that the increased number of targets eliminates the need to be willing or living.
It's just mentioning the increase in number. That doesn't mean the other requirements are dropped.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Wouldn't every creature always be undetected, detected, friendly and hostile all at the same time to different targets? The status spell doesn't specify that the conditions are relative to any specific target, so maybe it is useless for telling attitude and detected type of statuses because characters are always existing in multiple states of subjective conditions.
Nefreet wrote: I would agree as well.
I disagree that the increased number of targets eliminates the need to be willing or living.
It's just mentioning the increase in number. That doesn't mean the other requirements are dropped.
This other Nefreet seems to think differently.
Fair enough. Thank you for calling that out.
There is one difference between the two, although I am not certain whether it matters.
Heal lists changes in its Effects section, whereas Status doesn't.
Some spells restrict you to willing targets.
Heal is clearly not one of those spells, as written in both its Targets section and its Effects.
Status is only willing creatures, both in its Targets section and its Effects. We have to look to the Heightened section before the wording changes, and I can't find anywhere that suggests that change is meaningful.
I think the increase in number of targets of status when heightened isn't meant to over-rule the willing requirement.
Unlike the change in targets of the heal spell, there is no contradiction in terms - no words which aren't compatible with the existing phrasing of the target entry.
Heal removes the willing requirement because it goes from "1 willing living creature or 1 undead" to "all living and undead creatures" - where status goes from "1 willing living creature" to "10 willing living creatures"
...at least unless we are also arguing that the heightened entry of status means the targets don't have to be living anymore either. But still, we aren't talking about an explicit change, it is at best an implication and implications don't normally count as rules changes.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
The wording of the rules to heighten banishment would appear to back up that the heightened version of this spell(status) still has to target living and willing creatures. As banishment has to target a creature not on its home plane otherwise the spell doesn't make any sense.
I would argue that they could have used better language to make this more clear, something like 'increase the number of targets to up to 10' which would follow the wording of a lot of other spells and keeps it a lot clear all other restrictions apply.
(Banishment heightening :
Heightened (9th) You can target up to 10 creatures. The extra material component affects targets to which it is anathema.
)
Recent threads in Rules Discussion
|
