PDA

View Full Version : A permanecy idea.



Lord Vukodlak
2010-10-05, 10:08 PM
I just had an interesting idea, say you use magic jar to possess the party fighter. While in possession of his body you cast see invisibility followed up by permanency.

Normally you can't make see invisibility permanent on another creature because "see invisibility" is self only and permanency only works on spells you cast yourself.
So then who gets the permanent spell.

Another_Poet
2010-10-05, 10:57 PM
I'd give it to the fighter, as it is a clever usage for on the caster's part.

When the party started using this setup to mass-perm self-only spells on the fighter I'd put my foot down.

I think a more "spirit of RAW" interpretation would have it go with the caster back to his own body, however, since he is the "self" that the self-only spell (or "person" that the personal spell, if you prefer) is attached to.

A very strict reading of RAW might have the Permanent effect lost forever when the caster returns to his body, since the creature who was the target of the spell no longer exists - it consisted of a fighter with a caster mind, which is no more.

Lord Vukodlak
2010-10-05, 11:15 PM
I don't think the rules are quite clear even spirit of raw.
Permanency says you can't cast "those spells"Comprehend languages, Darkvision, Detect magic, Read magic, See invisibility, and Tongues are all self only. on other creatures.
It doesn't actually say you can't make them permanent. The reason you can't normally make them permanent is permanency requires you cast the spell yourself.

Soren Hero
2010-10-06, 12:50 AM
id have to give it to the caster, because his mind and soul are transferred via magic jar. magic jar prevents the caster from gaining any abilities of the main body, including supernatural, extraordinary and spell-like so I assume that it works in reverse as well. the problem lies in the classification of permanent magical effects, and whether or not they fall under these categories. I would argue that it is a spell-like ability because it is something that is bound up in your own life force (soul,etc), but I can see how it can be argued as the others. even so, if you don't get the supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like of a possessed creature, i would logically argue that if the creature gets it body back, it gets none of the spell-like, supernatural, or extraordinary abilities that you have bestowed on it.

in a similar vein, what happens if you get a wish bonus to ability while possessing a creature? do you get to keep the ability score increase, or does it stay with the body? if you answer this question, i think it can be reasoned that it works similarly to the magic jar/permanency

Lord Vukodlak
2010-10-06, 01:47 AM
Well with wish you can specify the target, as either your true self or the host. So its really not a good example as you can pick your target to a greater degree then most spells.

Permanent spells aren't spell-like abilities, No where in the spell description does it say the spells become supernatural or spell-like so they don't.
They are simply spells whose duration has been rendered permanent.

With magic jar "You can’t choose to activate the body’s extraordinary or supernatural abilities" The body still has them you simply can't turn them on. But what if they were turned on before hand or are always active?

The only thing I think is important is who is the spell targeting, when using magic jar, the host or the possessing spirit. Lets say your possessing a fighter and hit by baleful polymorph. You end the magic jar on your next action. NOW whose the tiny animal the wizard or the fighter?
To me I think the fighter was the target of the spell,

So logically if your possessing the fighter and cast see invisibility or resist energy on "yourself" they should remain on the fighter until the duration expires.

Soren Hero
2010-10-06, 02:30 AM
i think with wish in regards to the ability boost, its an inherent bonus, which is different than a permanent magical ability which can be dispelled, disjoined, etc...the baleful polymorph line of reasoning is pretty solid...but the permanency for see invisibility clearly states "self only"...magic jars moves your mind/soul from one body to another, and it takes all your abilities with it. it is clearly taking your "self" and moving it...i'd say that your "self" still has the permanent see invisibility, whether it is in one body or another

CalamaroJoe
2010-10-06, 02:56 AM
In my opinion it would be useful to think in the other way:
I you cast see invisibility followed by permanency (you now have a permanent spell on you) and then you cast magic jar and possess a creature, do you see invisible things?

If you think, as I do, that the character benefits from the spell, so you deem that a spell of that kind is bound to the soul/mind/self. So in the case of the caster+PCfighter the spell will return together with the caster.

If you think that the PCfighter would retain the spell, then would also happen that at the moment of possession the caster lose all spell of that kind that he cast before on him/herself (permanent or not).

Lord Vukodlak
2010-10-06, 04:19 AM
.but the permanency for see invisibility clearly states "self only"

No it doesn't clearly state that, the permanency spell states "You cannot cast these spells on other creatures" it does not say you can't make them permanent.

Ignoring the spell permanency for a moment, say your possessing a body and while inside it you cast the following spells resist energy, shield, mage armor, see invisibility and read magic, your also hit by a shroud of flame spell which causes continual fire damage to you. You end the MJ before any of the durations run out.
Which spells stay on the host and which spells transfer back with you? Would the see invisibility stay on the host body or go with you.[remember permanency hasn't been cast in this case].
The fact that permanency makes the spell permanent should have no baring as to if the spell stays with you when you swap bodies all that should matter is if the normal duration spell stays with the host and if the normal duration spell stays with the host so would the permanent duration spell.


In my opinion it would be useful to think in the other way: you cast see invisibility followed by permanency (you now have a permanent spell on you) and then you cast magic jar and possess a creature, do you see invisible things?

No you can't, all permanency does is in essence is make the duration permanent. Would you keep a resist energy or ray of enfeeblement cast on you before the transfer? or a shield spell. I wouldn't think so.

CalamaroJoe
2010-10-06, 09:25 AM
The fact that permanency makes the spell permanent should have no baring as to if the spell stays with you when you swap bodies all that should matter is if the normal duration spell stays with the host and if the normal duration spell stays with the host so would the permanent duration spell.


I totally second this line of thought.



Ignoring the spell permanency for a moment, say your possessing a body and while inside it you cast the following spells resist energy, shield, mage armor, see invisibility and read magic, your also hit by a shroud of flame spell which causes continual fire damage to you. You end the MJ before any of the durations run out.
Which spells stay on the host and which spells transfer back with you?


I would rule (or at least would have ruled when I first read this thread): resist energy, shield, mage armor, shroud of flame stay on the host; see invisibility and read magic transfer back.
The difference that I see is the fact that the former produce some sort of physical change or physical barrier, the latter bestow some extra sense or ability on you.

I see that all this is heavily subject to judgement or personal views. Going on mechanics probably one should find a suitable cutting point. For example all the spells that have in the description "Target: You" remain with caster, or all the spells of Divination school...
Yes, you can also judge that every spell just remain with the body on which it was cast.