|
Just started playing a Halfling Mesmerist in the Hell's Vengence AP and I am looking at picking up this particularly nasty seeming spell at level two or three, but the saving throws have me a little confused.
To start with, I am seeing two slightly different versions of the spell:
Here is the spell test as per Archives of Nethys: Source
PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 296
Casting
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (tiny fruit tarts and a feather)
Effect
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one creature; see text
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance yes
Description
This spell afflicts the subject with uncontrollable laughter. It collapses into gales of manic laughter, falling prone. The subject can take no actions while laughing, but is not considered helpless. After the spell ends, it can act normally. On the creature's next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. This is a full round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. If this save is successful, the effect ends. If not, the creature continues laughing for the entire duration.
A creature with an Intelligence score of 2 or lower is not affected. A creature whose type is different from the caster's receives a +4 bonus on its saving throw, because humor doesn't “translate” well.Here is the text from the actual CRB PDF I re-downloaded this afternoon: School
enchantment (compulsion) [mind-affecting]; Level bard 1, sorcerer/wizard 2
Components V, S, M (tiny fruit tarts and a feather)
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one creature; see text
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance yes
This spell afflicts the subject with uncontrollable laughter. It collapses into gales of manic laughter, falling prone. The subject can take no actions while laughing, but is not considered helpless. On the creature’s next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. If successful, the effect ends and the creature is treated as if it spent a full-round action on its turn.
A creature with an Intelligence score of 2 or lower is not affected. A creature whose type is different from the caster’s receives a +4 bonus on its saving throw, because humor doesn’t “translate” well
The major change between the two versions is the clarification that making a saving throw does not actually take an action (which the spell specifically denies you) and removes the 'otherwise, the spell runs the full duration' line. I should note that my 'Sixth Printing March 2013' physical copy of the CRB matches the PDF text.
First off, am I correct in assuming that AoN.com has the 'non-current' spell text and needs to be updated? I guess it is possible there was an errata after the last actual printing of the CRB, but that seems less likely...
Secondly, is "next turn" supposed to be read as "on the first turn of the spell duration only" or as "on every turn of the spell duration"? The AoN.com text definitely supports the former interpretation with its "If not, the creature continues laughing for the entire duration" text, while the CRB version is a bit more more ambiguous. RAW, I'd lean toward toward "you only get an initial save and a second save on your first turn under its effect" but given how powerful this seems, I'm guessing the RAI is likely 'you get an initial save and another save each round under its effect' for the sake of balance.
|
AoN has the 4th edition text; it was changed with the 5th edition.
(Yes, I still have the downloads of the 4th and 5th editions; I am strange that way. laugh.)
When it was Tasha's Hideous Laughter (3.5) it hadn't a save to end the effect.
Like Hold person, it was changed in Pathfinder, but the text is very different:
Hideous Laughter: "On the creature’s next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect."
Hold Person: "Each round on its turn, the subject may attempt a new saving
throw to end the effect."
I think the target gets to try a save only during his first turn after the spell has been cast, not every turn. If the RAI was to have him save every turn the Hold Person text was way neater than the Hideous Laughter text.
|
|
The text in the CRB is the most recent and was changed to correct the problem of the creature taking a full round action when it can't take actions (Hold Person still has that problem, the person is Paralyzed but attempting a save is a full round action).
Making the save at the end of the turn is different from making the save and, if successful, having it count as a full-round action. The first doesn't allow you to take free or immediate action, while the second allows you to do that.
No idea what is RAI, but I am in favor of allowing them.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The text in the CRB is the most recent and was changed to correct the problem of the creature taking a full round action when it can't take actions (Hold Person still has that problem, the person is Paralyzed but attempting a save is a full round action).
Hold person doesn’t have a problem because it makes you Paralyzed. While paralyzed you can still take “purely mental actions.” As opposed to hideous laughter, which flat out says you can take no actions. If attempting a Will saving throw isn’t a “purely mental action” then nothing is.
Hideous laughter was always fairly obvious how it worked (you get one more try as a full-round action next turn, if you fail it runs the full duration) but it also had a rules issue as discussed above. The latest printing fixed the rules problem.
Hideous Laughter: "On the creature’s next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect."
Hold Person: "Each round on its turn, the subject may attempt a new saving
throw to end the effect."I think the target gets to try a save only during his first turn after the spell has been cast, not every turn. If the RAI was to have him save every turn the Hold Person text was way neater than the Hideous Laughter text.
This is an odd post saying that Diego is more clearly correct than he says he is.
A fuller quote from the current version of Hideous Laughter is-
"On the creature’s next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. This is a full round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. If this save is successful, the effect ends. If not, the creature continues laughing for the entire duration."
There is no need to say I think, there is nothing unclear about what the rule means. Technically the last 2 sentences of the last quote don't need to be there, the rule would mean exactly the same thing if they were absent.
|
|
Hideous Laughter: "On the creature’s next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect."
Hold Person: "Each round on its turn, the subject may attempt a new saving
throw to end the effect."I think the target gets to try a save only during his first turn after the spell has been cast, not every turn. If the RAI was to have him save every turn the Hold Person text was way neater than the Hideous Laughter text.
This is an odd post saying that Diego is more clearly correct than he says he is.
A fuller quote from the current version of Hideous Laughter is-
"On the creature’s next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. This is a full round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. If this save is successful, the effect ends. If not, the creature continues laughing for the entire duration."
There is no need to say I think, there is nothing unclear about what the rule means. Technically the last 2 sentences of the last quote don't need to be there, the rule would mean exactly the same thing if they were absent.
As Diego noted in his first response, this is NOT the correct spell text: It is the text per AoN, but the site appears to have missed a revision from the 5th printing.
The 'correct' text (as I included in my original post) drops the line about the effect running the full duration if the second save is failed, thus being more ambiguous than the original version.
As I see it, this line was probably dropped because:
a) It was just considered redundant, or
b) It was thought to be too powerful for a level 1 spell (for some casters, at least) and they wanted to change it to a 'make a save each round' like most other 'incapacitating' spells but they neglected to alter the 'next turn' part of the text.
Considering how powerful this spell is when compared to Hold Person (since it knocks your target prone, prevents them from taking any actions, and can be used against intelligent non-humanoid targets (albeit with a saving throw bonus)), I'm guessing they did intend to nerf it, but RAW I think the use of 'next turn' in the spell text means you don't get a save every round.
Taja- You are quite right in that I quoted the wrong rules as the current wording of Hideous Laughter. My bad.
The 'correct' text (as I included in my original post) drops the line about the effect running the full duration if the second save is failed, thus being more ambiguous than the original version.
As I see it, this line was probably dropped because:
a) It was just considered redundant, or
b) It was thought to be too powerful for a level 1 spell (for some casters, at least) and they wanted to change it to a 'make a save each round' like most other 'incapacitating' spells but they neglected to alter the 'next turn' part of the text.
I think it is clearly a).
A spell has a spot for saving throw in the headings, which says in this case-
"Saving Throw Will negates"
If there is nothing in the following text to change that the target will get just one saving throw which negates the spell if successful.
The text says, as relevant-
"On the creature’s next turn, it may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. If successful, the effect ends and the creature is treated as if it spent a full-round action on its turn.
The text only says there is one extra save on the next turn, therefore there is only one extra save on the next turn. I don't know why people think this is ambiguous.
If Hideous Laughter was supposed to work the way Hold Person does, then I would expect the text to be worded in the same way.
|
|
If attempting a Will saving throw isn’t a “purely mental action” then nothing is.
Circumstances force me to disagree with you. You can make saving throws when it is not your turn (that's the usual case...) so if it were an action at all it would have to be an immediate one. But you are not restricted to only one, nor does it use your next swift, so making a saving throw cannot be an "action" at all.
"Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don’t take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow."
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat/ "not an action"
In the specific case of Hold Person, "The subject becomes paralyzed and freezes in place. It is aware and breathes normally but cannot take any actions, even speech. Each round on its turn, the subject may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. This is a full-round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. A winged creature who is paralyzed cannot flap its wings and falls. A swimmer can't swim and may drown."
Since 'making a (Will) saving throw' is a full-round action in this specific case, it is presumably a 'purely mental' action as this both makes sense and those are the only actions one can actually take while under the effects of this spell. As such, Belafon's point is that this spell actually works as written while the original version of Hideous Laughter (which required a full round action while denying you the ability to make any actions) did not.
Making a Saving Throw is not an action, except when it specifically is...
|
|
Self-Necro for a follow-up question: Is Hideous Laughter from an evil caster blocked by Protection From Evil? I've been reviewing the relevant FAQ and can't quite tell if forcing someone to RotFL falls under 'exercise control over the target' or not. Protection From Evil: Does this work against all charm and compulsion effects? Or just against charm and compulsion effects where the caster is able to exercise control over the target, such as charm person, command, and dominate person (and thus not effects like sleep or confusion, as the caster does not have ongoing influence or puppet-like control of the target)?
The latter interpretation is correct: protection from evil only works on charm and compulsion effects where the caster is able to exercise control over the target, such as command, charm person, and dominate person; it doesn't work on sleep or confusion. (Sleep is a border case for this issue, but the designers feel that "this spell overrides your brain's sleep centers" is different enough than "this spell overrides your resistance to commands from others.")
At first glance, I'm thinking this spell fundamentally denies actions rather than controlling them, so PfE does not protect against it, but I'm not particularly confident in this conclusion...
|
|
The caster doesn’t have any ability to choose the targets actions after the casting, so it would not fall under the criteria that protection from evil uses.
Seconded. Many posts notwithstanding, PfE doesn't "shut down a whole school of magic". It heavily hampers several of the best Enchantment spells, but several good ones are still fully efficient.