Solipsism (Su): At 1st level, whenever the enigma uses hypnotic stare on a creature, instead of applying a penalty on the creature’s saving throws, the enigma begins to fade from the creature’s view. Until the enigma’s next turn, the enigma gains the effects of concealment against that creature (unless it can see invisible creatures). Starting on the enigma’s next turn, he gains the effect of invisibility against that creature. These effects last as long as the enigma continues to use his hypnotic stare, but if he takes an action that would end invisibility, it ends his hypnotic stare immediately. The enigma can reinstate this effect whenever he wishes, but each time it begins with 1 round of concealment. At 8th level, attacks that would end invisibility do not end the enigma’s hypnotic stare, and after 1 round of concealment, he gains the benef its of greater invisibility against the target of his stare. For the purpose of bold stare improvements, the enigma’s hypnotic stare always has a penalty of –1.
And
All offensive combat actions, even those that don’t damage opponents, are considered attacks. Attempts to channel energy count as attacks if it would harm any creatures in the area. All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks. Spells that summon monsters or other allies are not attacks because the spells themselves don’t harm anyone.
So, how this work?
A invisible mesmerist using Solipsism stare, break invisibility?
1) Solipsim does not allow a saving throw, does not damage the target creature, and does not harm or hamper the target (except in the loosest sense that being invisible to the target puts the target at a disadvantage). So no, using it does not break its own invisibility.
2) We should problably assume the ability is written to actually work, and not be self-defeating. So even if you consider the loose sense of it hampering the target, the ability itself should be excluded from breaking the invisibility it creates. Though in that case it would break an invisiblity spell/potion, etc that had been applied prior to using solipsism.
Yeah... I can see the issue. While Hypnotic Star with Solipsism and a Bold Stare Improvement is not requiring a saving throw, it is 'otherwise harm[ing] or hamper[ing] a subject.'
I guess there would be a couple arguments here...
RAW:
Yep, it would break itself as it is a hindering effect. There is no reason to ever take a third level in this class/archetype combo... maybe it is good for dipping.
RAI:
Because the Hypnotic Stare ability says, "The creature doesn't remember it was affected (nor does it realize that it is currently being affected) unless the mesmerist allows it." then it doesn't count as an attack unless the mesmerist allows them to be aware.
I think as a GM I would clearly rule the later, but there is the RAW for you.
Solipsim does not ... hamper the target (except in the loosest sense that being invisible to the target puts the target at a disadvantage).
I think getting a minus to my will saves with no save to prevent it is pretty hampering!
We should problably assume the ability is written to actually work, and not be self-defeating.
I would agree, when determining RAI this is a great place to start... but RAW is RAW and needs some cookin'!
Though in that case it would break an invisiblity spell/potion, etc that had been applied prior to using solipsism.
I actually think you hit on why it might work by RAW. On the first round, when the 'hampering' bold stare improvement is applied, there is no invisibility to be broken as that doesn't come in until the second round. Maintaining the ability wouldn't break the invisibility as it is not an attack.
I suppose one could also argue that any negative to ANY saving throw is not applied the first round since it says, "instead of applying a penalty on the creature’s saving throws" as long as you only took Bold Stare Improvements that were minuses to saving throws they wouldn't be applied and thus no hampering.
Still, I think the best solution at the table is pretty clearly, "it doesn't count as an attack for the purposes of breaking itself as abilities need to actually work."
There is no problem with solipsism working at all because the ability states “ These effects last as long as the enigma continues to use his hypnotic stare, but if he takes an ACTION that would end invisibility, it ends his hypnotic stare immediately. ” and after the initial swift action to activate the stare (at which time there is no effect to break) the ability requires no ACTION to maintain and it is use of an ACTION that breaks the effect.
Solipsim does not ... hamper the target (except in the loosest sense that being invisible to the target puts the target at a disadvantage).I think getting a minus to my will saves with no save to prevent it is pretty hampering!
Despite it being bolded, I somehow missed that.
So, if the person is invisible by other means, the use of Solipsism will break the invisibility. But not the invisibility of Solipsism?
If solipsism has a bold stare improvement that imposes a penalty (a small number do not) then yes I believe it would break normal invisibility but not greater invisibility. But why would you use it to be invisible to one person when you are already invisible to everyone(unless all you wanted to do was impose a bold stare improvement penalty)?
If solipsism has a bold stare improvement that imposes a penalty (a small number do not) then yes I believe it would break normal invisibility but not greater invisibility. But why would you use it to be invisible to one person when you are already invisible to everyone(unless all you wanted to do was impose a bold stare improvement penalty)?
Just cenario. And any penalty are welcome!
There is no problem with solipsism working at all because the ability states “ These effects last as long as the enigma continues to use his hypnotic stare, but if he takes an ACTION that would end invisibility, it ends his hypnotic stare immediately. ” and after the initial swift action to activate the stare (at which time there is no effect to break) the ability requires no ACTION to maintain and it is use of an ACTION that breaks the effect.
Good point! Maybe using the invisibility spell after the stare, and then keeping on, is a good strategy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Despite it being bolded, I somehow missed that.Solipsim does not ... hamper the target (except in the loosest sense that being invisible to the target puts the target at a disadvantage).I think getting a minus to my will saves with no save to prevent it is pretty hampering!
You actually didn’t miss anything… Sean Mahoney did… “For the purposes of bold stare improvements”. Solipsism on its own does not impose any penalties, it simply fools your target into believing you are invisible and erases their memory of your stare. The last line in the ability sets any and all penalties/bonuses/effects of any bold stare improvements you can apply as if your stare had a -1 penalty. But… yes technically any bold stares would be “harmful effects”… however, those penalties are applied at the same time as the invisibility, and because you are not invisible prior to hampering the target invisibility is not broken by the application of the effect. Every round after is simply maintaining the effect, and nothing in the rules says that maintaining a harmful effect on a target breaks invisibility, just applying.