Comprehensive Wording of Mark of Justice and Geas-Quest

[JeminiZero]

Comprehensive Wording of Mark of Justice and Geas-Quest

Lets say for a moment that you found yourself in Roy's position (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0295.html): You have an incredibly cunning, ruthless, and dangerous criminal (lets say a Rogue/Wizard/Unseen Seer with maxed skills and reasonable spell access). And you want to/are forced to bring along this criminal with the rest of your party. You have the options of casting Mark of Justice (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/markOfJustice.htm) (henceforth abbreviated to MoJ) and/or Geas-Quest (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasQuest.htm) (henceforth abbreviated to GQ) on said criminal (assume that these spells are cast at a caster level so high that the criminal cannot possibly remove these spells himself).

However, you are ALSO reliant on this criminal to actually fight for you, and bluff/spy on/steal from your enemies. Hence you cannot create blanket restrictions (e.g. do not attack any creature). How would you word the conditions of these spells so as to minimize the chances of said Criminal subverting his parole, without entirely crippling his offensive capacity? (For the purposes of wording, we use the term Very Important Persons (VIPs) to indicate any member of the party.)

Note the slight difference between MoJ and GQ: MoJ takes the form of behaviour (e.g. lying) that will trigger the mark. When translated to GQ, these instead become "do-not" restrictions (e.g. do not lie). Also, GQ is more open ended and allows positive orders (e.g. always tell the truth) as well.


Mark of Justice (Behaviour that will trigger the mark)
*Being more than 1 mile from any one VIP (rather than all VIPs, in case the party has to split up)
*Communicating any untruths to any VIP (we use communicate instead of just "speak" to cover writing and telepathy)
*Stealing from any VIP
*Attacking any VIP
*Allowing any creature under your command, or any creatures under their command, to attack any VIP
*Using an effect with NO saving throw (some abilities have multiple different effects, with some effects having a save), from any ability (defined as any spell, spell-like ability, psionic power, psi-like ability, supernatural ability or extraordinary ability), to target a VIP, or that includes a VIP within its area, UNLESS the effect only affects willing creatures (e.g. Dimension Door).
*Using an effect WITH a saving throw, from any ability, which results in any VIP ATTEMPTING to save (hence excluding effects which VIPs willingly accept with no save attempt e.g. a wanted plane shift).
*Allowing any creature under your command, or any creatures under their command, to use an effect with NO saving throw from any ability, to target a VIP, or that includes a VIP within its area, UNLESS the effect only affects willing creatures.
*Allowing any creature under your command, or any creatures under their command, to use an effect WITH a saving throw, from any ability, which results in any VIP ATTEMPTING to save
*This mark can also be triggered by a command word (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0569.html)


Geas-Quest
*(As above, but rephrased as Do-Not-XYZ. Because GQ is more open ended, you can also add the further exception to some of the above: "unless explicitly ordered to do so by the VIP in question").
*Take no action(s) contrary to the goals of the VIPs or, if that should not be possible, then take the action(s) least contrary to said goals.
*Take all reasonable steps to prevent the establishment or perpetuation of untruths upon the VIPs
*Always answer the questions of any VIP to the best of your knowledge.
*Obey the orders of a VIP to the best of your ability.


Any potential loopholes/suggestions?

[NM020110]

I would add "unless explicitly ordered to do so by the VIP in question." for most of those.

Perhaps these two would also help?
"Take no action contrary to the goals of the VIPs or, if that should not be possible, then take the action(s) least contrary to said goals."
"Take all reasonable steps to prevent the establishment or perpetuation of untruths upon the VIPs and their associates."

[Ashtagon]

Where do you get the idea that MoJ is a series of "do not" clauses"? Reading the spell description, what I get is that the basic trigger is "If X then trigger MoJ". X can be pretty much anything. However, it does appear to be limited to a single clause as trigger. The spell description says "any act" (singular). So you can't chain these.

Geas operates in one of two ways. The first lets you give an open-ended command, but is of limited duration. The second lets you set a complex task of limited duration, but automatically ends at that point.

For the job you are proposing, I think the correct spell is charm person or dominate person. The correct answer to the original question is "Those spells don't work that way."

[JeminiZero]

I would add "unless explicitly ordered to do so by the VIP in question." for most of those.

Should be possible for GQ, but I think its a bit more restrictive for MoJ which is a relatively hard do-not list (also see my comment to Ashtagon below).


Perhaps these two would also help?

"Take no action contrary to the goals of the VIPs or, if that should not be possible, then take the action(s) least contrary to said goals."

Thats actually pretty good. I'll add that in.


"Take all reasonable steps to prevent the establishment or perpetuation of untruths upon the VIPs and their associates."

Given how frequently PCs lie to their supposed "associates", I would probably exclude the last bit. :smallbiggrin:


Where do you get the idea that MoJ is a series of "do not" clauses"? Reading the spell description, what I get is that the basic trigger is "If X then trigger MoJ". X can be pretty much anything.


You are technically right about this. However, another way of viewing "if (act) then trigger", is to say that the effect of MoJ on the target, is "do-not-perform (act)".

I suppose to be more accurate, I should take the "do-not" list above, remove the "do-not" in front, and relabel the list as "behaviour that will trigger the MoJ".


However, it does appear to be limited to a single clause as trigger. The spell description says "any act" (singular). So you can't chain these.


That is one possible intepretation (since behaviour is ambigious enough to refer to a single specific act, or a range of actions). However, even if you subscribe to the more restrictive intepretation, you can still stack multiple MoJs on the same target, so that breaking any one act will trigger something.

[Ashtagon]

You are technically right about this. However, another way of viewing "if (act) then trigger", is to say that the effect of MoJ on the target, is "do-not-perform (act)".

I suppose to be more accurate, I should take the "do-not" list above, remove the "do-not" in front, and relabel the list as "behaviour that will trigger the MoJ".

Let's say you want someone to avoid a particular place.

"The mark will trigger if you set foot within a mile of the Temple of Isis."

Contrariwise, suppose you want him to go to that temple...

"The mark will trigger if you ever spend a night farther from the Temple of Isis as you were on the previous night."

It's all in your clever usage of wording the sentence.


That is one possible interpretation (since behaviour is ambiguous enough to refer to a single specific act, or a range of actions). However, even if you subscribe to the more restrictive interpretation, you can still stack multiple MoJs on the same target, so that breaking any one act will trigger something.

As a general house rule to stop wizards going insane with power, I ban conjunctions ("and" and "or") from spells that are shaped by a free-form sentence. Wish is the most notorious example, but geas and MoJ also have this issue. ymmv

[Elfinor]

Where do you get the idea that MoJ is a series of "do not" clauses"? Reading the spell description, what I get is that the basic trigger is "If X then trigger MoJ". X can be pretty much anything. However, it does appear to be limited to a single clause as trigger. The spell description says "any act" (singular). So you can't chain these. Yeah, I think the OP got it confused with Greater Mark of Justice (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0569.html), which is (AFAIK) a homebrew spell that Rich made up.


Geas operates in one of two ways. The first lets you give an open-ended command, but is of limited duration. The second lets you set a complex task of limited duration, but automatically ends at that point.A geas spell should work fine? You are capable of setting only one task/abstention, but this could very well be 'obey all of my commands'. Lesser Geas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasLesser.htm) allow open-ended task to be set, and Geas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasQuest.htm) follows the rules of Lesser Geas but has a permanent duration.


*Take no action(s) contrary to the goals of the VIPs or, if that should not be possible, then take the action(s) least contrary to said goals. I think this one is the best one. So long as your goals are clearly prioritized, there is little room to seize on, say, killing a person over a VIP's brief flash of extreme anger or fear if you have 'do not physically attack anyone that I don't physically attack, except in self-defence/defence of me' as a high priority goal.

[Ashtagon]

, and Geas follows the rules of Lesser Geas but has a permanent duration.

Nope. Geas has the same duration as lesser geas.

[Elfinor]

Nope. Geas has the same duration as lesser geas.:smallconfused: And I do not know where I got that idea from, but I've thought it for forever. Still, I suppose at least it's hassle free one spell slot guaranteed renewal.

[JeminiZero]

Let's say you want someone to avoid a particular place.

"The mark will trigger if you set foot within a mile of the Temple of Isis."

Contrariwise, suppose you want him to go to that temple...

"The mark will trigger if you ever spend a night farther from the Temple of Isis as you were on the previous night."

It's all in your clever usage of wording the sentence.

Again, you can still phrase it as a "do-not" restriction
*Do not go within 1 mile of the Temple of Isis
*Do not spend any night farther from the Temple of Isis, then you were on the previous night

Edit: It has come to my attention that there are a bunch of useful spells that do NOT have the harmless tag. E.g. Dim-Door (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dimensionDoor.htm), Teleport (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/teleport.htm), Plane Shift (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/planeShift.htm), Atonement (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm), Break Enchantment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/breakEnchantment.htm), etc.

Which means that the current wording for MoJ needs a bit of revising.

[Raimun]

I'd put him or her inside a diamond for one year. That ought to sort him or her out.

Or just try to redeem him or her (from now on, "the evul 0ne") otherwise:

"C'mon, be at least Neutral!"

"Can I still be Chaotic?"

"It's a deal!"

Funny thing, the best solutions don't sometimes need magic.

As a short term solution, I'd just:

GQ the evul 0ne to follow the quest others are following (unless already following).

And:

MoJ the evul 0ne to never break the law of the land (if benevolent), even if not under it's jurisdiction or...
I'm not sure if you can state only one trigger with the casting of the spell but if you can cast one MoJ on the evul 0ne, what's to stop casting it multiple times? Anyway, just put triggers on any unwanted behavior with the suffix "... unless ordered by [Creature X]." Creature X being suitably decent but heroic individual.

Having multiple MoJs (like a gazillion) would be also beneficial in that way it would take more time and recources to get rid of them all. Even if the miscreant is a spell caster, that would mean he would have to prepare/use awful lot of Remove Curses/Break Enchanments. Either he wastes one or more days trying to get rid of them, leaving him or her wide open for a Scry and Die-attack without high level spells or has to fight with MoJ activated. Better put multiple MoJs (with different wording) against attacking party members. You know, for good measure.

Personally, I'd rather not use GQ or MoJ, especially if the evul 0ne is another PC. I'd rather trust the evul 0ne's player to not play his char as Stupid Evil.