Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2012 17:07:27 GMT -5
if a PC or a NPC falls under the spell of Mind Control, do they get any sort of resistance roll per turn? any sort of chance to 'snap out of it'?
|
|
|
Post by klingor on Sept 6, 2012 18:54:17 GMT -5
Ewookie, Now I've get the thread (!), I'd say not automatically. However, since they won't perform a suicidal action, then if they WERE asked to, then I would give them a chance to re-resist the Mind Control every turn from then on. I would also say that a suicidal action can be subjective as well as objective. Cutting your own throat or jumping off a 200ft high cliff is objectively suicidal - attacking a 7 hex Dragon isn't, but it is as close as makes no difference, so I would allow a character to wonder, at that point, if he were in his right mind, and hence to start to resist the Mind Control. I would state it as follows - an action by a Mind Controlled character is considered suicidal if the character would not try it if he weren't under compulsion because he would expect it to result in either his own death or deliberate self-harm. Actions such as firing a crossbow at someone known to have Reverse Missiles on them would be considered suicidal/deliberate self-harm. Cheers Colin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2012 20:39:44 GMT -5
good thoughts. in particular, i was thinking...
Party: Char1, Char2, Char3, Char4
Char1 comes under Mind Control and is told to attack his own party members.
shouldn't Char1 get some sort of disbelief-like check (win IQ against caster or spell if caster is not present)? if so, when? how often?
before anyone answers, consider if the tables are turned. the party mage puts Orc1 under Mind Control and tells him to attack Orc2, Orc3, and Orc4.
since Mind Control falls under ILLUSION spells, i was original thinking that Mind Control worked something like this: ...the caster creates an elaborate, fully immersive illusion in the mind of the one person, the victim. the victim sees enemies when he is really attacking allies.
however, i think it may work better to consider Mind Control as a 'power of suggestion' type thing. then, the victim would get a disbelief check with each commandment he receives...and it wouldn't be free. [caster casts Mind Control and wins IQ vs the victim. the victim can do nothing on his next term (per spell description). caster issues command. victim spends turn trying to disbelieve. if he fails, he follows the command on the next turn. if he wins, he acts with freewill on his next turn.]
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on Sept 7, 2012 10:59:51 GMT -5
Good thoughts. A strict reading of the rules would indicate there is no roll to break free until the encounter is over (since static spells last the duration of an encounter). The way I have handled this, if a character is tasked to do something suicidal, they do nothing instead.
But I like the way you guys have reasoned this out. These alternatives make sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2012 13:10:23 GMT -5
bret, your 'strict reading' of the rules...i see that now but as i said above, i was originally thinking of Mind Control as a type of illusion that exists only in the mind of the victim, so i would not have had the same interpretation. i can see that 'strict reading' now, so i think i will play it that way if adventure text doesn't instruct me to do otherwise. i will have to have faith that you adventure writers won't be too sadistic with it's application. it is a bit scary that there is no chance to break spell until someone dies (the caster or the victim). unless there is something elsewhere in the rules that could be used to break the spell? also, this makes me wonder if Mind Control and Sleep might more logically be moved to the Enchanting section of the spells since the special rules of 'disbelief' do not apply to them? sidenote: if it weren't for the 'disbelief' rule, i think even Illusion and Image should/could/would fall under Enchanting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2012 19:14:40 GMT -5
i'm not real crazy about my alternative above either. it seems that, during play, Mind Control could devolve into another form of Freeze (too many 'no-action' turns).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2012 13:45:57 GMT -5
further questions:
am i correct in assuming that a spell dissolves when the caster dies?
another mage could use Dispel Magic to break the Mind Control. winning IQ against the caster seems to have fair odds. however, winning IQ against the IQ level of a spell seems very improbable. i am wondering if i have the correct concept of how that works. This is how i think it works:
Mind Control has an IQ level of 13. A mage with IQ14 trying to break the spell (while the caster is absent) must roll a 14 to succeed. If the mage had IQ15, he would have to roll a 14 or 15 to succeed.
Surely I am missing something as the spell is actually harder to break when the caster is absent.
|
|
|
Post by klingor on Sept 11, 2012 15:13:27 GMT -5
Hi, My interpretation/understanding of a contested check is that there is no absolute winning score. It is a contest of minds. All you have to do is roll more than your opponent while remaining within your own limits. If the roll is against IQ and you have IQ 14, you have a 50% chance of remaining within your own limits if you roll using 4 dice. If you choose to use 3 or even 2 dice, your chance of remaining within your own limits greatly increases, however you have to beat your opponent's score as well. If your opponent (with an IQ of 12 ) rolls 12 using 2 dice, you have to roll more than that to win. So, if you with an IQ of 18 elect to roll 4 dice and score 11, you have beaten your own limit (18) but you haven't beaten his score- he rolled 12, you only rolled 11 - no-one said life was fair! If the test is against a spell who's caster is not there ie against IQ level of spell, I think it's up to the GM to decide how many dice. As long as this information is passed to the players, then it seems fine to me. Cheers Colin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2012 17:54:07 GMT -5
let's say my IQ is 14. i choose to roll 3 dice and roll a 10. let's say the spell IQ level is 11. i failed to win IQ against the IQ level of the spell.
^is that right?
|
|
|
Post by darkscar on Sept 12, 2012 10:17:29 GMT -5
let's say my IQ is 14. i choose to roll 3 dice and roll a 10. let's say the spell IQ level is 11. i failed to win IQ against the IQ level of the spell. ^is that right? I believe that's correct, ewookie. I say "believe" because I'm going on memory. I just viewed the most recent edition of the rules on the website and found this isn't covered. I could swear I found this point addressed specifically in some earlier rules that were published a year or so ago. TO DCG: Also, in the newest version of the rules online "winning IQ against his target" is mentioned for spellcasters to win a check but the term is never defined.
|
|
|
Post by klingor on Sept 12, 2012 12:48:17 GMT -5
Hi. I interpret it as per Dispel Magic as described in The Thing in the Lake. It is a contested spell between the person Dispelling and the original caster. If the original caster is not present (eg has been killed or the spell was cast from a scroll), use the IQ level of the spell. In your example, the GM would also roll some number of dice (his choice) for the spell and would win if his total was higher that yours but not greater than 11. It is the IQ equivalent of a contested ST check. I may be wrong, but I interpret it this way because I like magic cast by higher IQ mages to reflect that superiority in power eg Iron Flesh cast by a mage IQ 30 on himself should be much more difficult to dispel than when cast by an IQ 14 mage, even though it is the same spell. For Mind Control, it is an attempt to mentally dominate an opponent - a 'mental grapple' if you like. Cheers Colin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2012 13:46:46 GMT -5
aaaahhhh. ok. i see now. you just pretend that there is a caster there with an IQ that is equal to the IQ level of the spell. makes much more sense...and seems much better balanced against winning IQ with the caster. thank you for clarifying that, klingor!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2012 22:40:38 GMT -5
i understand how the check against the IQ level of spell works now.
bret, george, or anyone, i would still like hear feedback on relocating Mind Control and Sleep spells to the Enchanting section of the spells or why they belong under the Illusion section of the spells.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2012 21:23:44 GMT -5
TO DCG: Also, in the newest version of the rules online "winning IQ against his target" is mentioned for spellcasters to win a check but the term is never defined. actually, that is defined: DOING THINGS Winning a Check First, the attacker decides how many dice he will roll. Then the defender decides. Both roll their dice and the higher total wins--unless it exceeds their character's attribute(+skill)). If both go over, both fail. On a tie, the higher attribute wins.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2012 21:31:23 GMT -5
another question: is it common practice to allow the use of Mind Control on animals? strict reading of the rules don't specify if commands/instructions are issued verbally or telepathically.
|
|