Why do they keep releasing spells like this?
You emit a plaintive cry to lure your enemies closer. Each creature in the emanation that can hear you must attempt a Will save
Explicity refers to enemies but then targets all creatures.
Do we have a general ruling on how to read these?
I totally agree!
Caster's choice, perhaps? :P
It seems to me that the first line is flavor text describing what the spell does, and has nothing to do with mechanics.
Yea after the first short text, its always creature instead of enemy, so it effect all creatures.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's like if they published a grenade that said: "You throw a device to destroy your enemies. Choose a point 30' away, and force every creature within 15' to make a reflex save..."
There's intent, then there's mechanics. Luring Wail is supposed to lure your enemies closer, but you have to use it in appropriate circumstances where only enemies will be effected.
>>necromancy<<
Hey Community,
This spell is sustained and has the Incapacitation tag.
If a creature is Fascinated by this spell, can an ally use a "hostile action" (say, a non-lethal strike) to end the effect?
Does it matter if the subject failed or critically failed?
I know Fascinated is a weird condition - does the Incapicitation tag affect this analysis?
Would it be too powerful / too weak compared to other similar-level spells to interpret if "slapping" could end the effect one way or the other?
Thanks in advance!
If a creature is Fascinated by this spell, can an ally use a "hostile action" (say, a non-lethal strike) to end the effect?
Yes, that would work. Generally that is one of the last choice options for removing Fascinated. But in this case with some of the special rules for this spell, it may be worth it.
Does it matter if the subject failed or critically failed?
Probably not. I might not allow critical failed attack to work, but a failed Strike is definitely a Hostile Action under other uses (such as breaking invisibility or triggering Needle of Vengeance).
I know Fascinated is a weird condition - does the Incapicitation tag affect this analysis?
Incapacitation would affect applying the spell effect to the target in the first place, not removing it.
Would it be too powerful / too weak compared to other similar-level spells to interpret if "slapping" could end the effect one way or the other?
If people are using the Fascinated condition in combat, they probably already know that it doesn't work well. This one being an AoE and having overrides that don't break the condition for the entire enemy team on the first attack means that it is already well ahead of the curve compared to other sources of the Fascinated condition.
So other than devaluing things like Snap Out of It, it would be a reasonable houserule to use.
Slapping them should have the Attack trait, so they are paying for the ability with actions and MAP.
And if you also decide that contact is actually needed (failed slap attack rolls don't break the fascination), then that means that they couldn't use it very well as a 3rd action after other attacks. That could be a point of differentiation between a slap to break Fascinated and an Nonlethal Strike (slap has higher chance of failing to remove the condition when at high MAP, but doesn't risk damage - Strike can remove the condition on a failed attack roll, but risks dealing damage if the dice aren't in your favor).