Lesser confusion is Elan's most effective spell

[gallagher]

I never really gave that spell a hard look, but it has no save, and has now been key at least twice (once getting away from Ganji and Enor, and now hitting that triceratops in 927)

Definitely getting a wand of this spell

[Killer Angel]

I never really gave that spell a hard look, but it has no save, and has now been key at least twice (once getting away from Ganji and Enor, and now hitting that triceratops in 927)

Definitely getting a wand of this spell

Will negates it.

That said, the spell is nice against low wisdom creatures, but with a wand, the ST will be easy to pass...

[littlebum2002]

How did it have any effect in this situation at all? V ended up hitting Roy anyway.


EDIT:

Never mind, that's Miron getting zapped in the corner, not Roy.

[137beth]

How did it have any effect in this situation at all? V ended up hitting Roy anyway.




Doesn't look like it...
EDIT: Ninja'd by an edit

[factotum]

Pretty sure Wizards realised the error of making spells with no saves with Otto's Irresistible Dance--they're not likely to do that again, and certainly not for a level 1 bard spell!

[littlebum2002]

Besides, even if they FAIL the save, there's still a 20% chance they're going to attack your party anyway. And if someone from your party is in melee with them (the closest person to them) that chance rises to 50%.

There's a reason it's a low-level spell.

[Imgran]

Gotta love the fact that Elan can neutralize TT's dinomount with one mediocre bard spell, but it took multiple wormholes and a Baleful Polymorph for Miron and Lauren to do the same to the Order.

Minimum effort, maximum result, for the win.

[Kyeudo]

Will negates it.

That said, the spell is nice against low wisdom creatures, but with a wand, the ST will be easy to pass...

Are we talking about the same lesser confusion (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/confusionLesser.htm)?

I see no saving throw listed.

[Zach J.]

It acts as a lesser form of the confusion spell which allows a will save.

[colanderman]

Are we talking about the same lesser confusion (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/confusionLesser.htm)?

I see no saving throw listed.

Lesser/greater spells usually only list differences from the "normal" version of the spell. If there were no save, it would list "Saving Throw: none". Confusion indeed allows a will save.

[Killer Angel]

Are we talking about the same lesser confusion (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/confusionLesser.htm)?

I see no saving throw listed.

Zach and colanderman were right, it's not listed 'cause you should refer to Confusion.


Gotta love the fact that Elan can neutralize TT's dinomount with one mediocre bard spell, but it took multiple wormholes and a Baleful Polymorph for Miron and Lauren to do the same to the Order.


To be fair, Elan's spell was almost a desperate try... :smallwink:

[Perseus]

Zach and colanderman were right, it's not listed 'cause you should refer to Confusion.



To be fair, Elan's spell was almost a desperate try... :smallwink:

Technically 1 in a Million ;p

[Chronos]

It doesn't say "as Confusion, except..."; it just says to refer to the Confusion spell to determine the effect (i.e., the random table).

[Bulldog Psion]

It doesn't say "as Confusion, except..."; it just says to refer to the Confusion spell to determine the effect (i.e., the random table).

That does indeed seem to be the case. What a confusing spell description! :smallbiggrin: An example of D&D magic that actually works! :smallwink:

[veti]

Otto's Irresistable Dance was something like 7th level, and it was a Touch spell. "No saving throw" was really the only reason to learn it.

But what's the will save of a triceratops? I'm guessing, not great. It was a smart choice to target on the dinosaur.

[KillianHawkeye]

It doesn't say "as Confusion, except..."; it just says to refer to the Confusion spell to determine the effect (i.e., the random table).

I know it doesn't say that, but you have to. Note that lesser confusion also does not list a Casting Time! Chalk another one up to bad editing.

[hamishspence]

Lesser/greater spells usually only list differences from the "normal" version of the spell.

This is true- in both the PHB and in the SRD.

[Kornaki]

Lesser/greater spells usually only list differences from the "normal" version of the spell. If there were no save, it would list "Saving Throw: none". Confusion indeed allows a will save.

I'm looking at d20srd.org and usually the lesser version of the spell is the one that is spelled out in detail. For example

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/planarAlly.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/restoration.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/globeOfInvulnerability.htm

and in all cases explicitly says "functions like lesser _____ except". I think lesser confusion is a disfunctionally written spell.

[factotum]

It doesn't say "as Confusion, except..."; it just says to refer to the Confusion spell to determine the effect (i.e., the random table).

In what universe would it make sense that the Lesser version of a spell does not require a saving throw, while the normal version *does*?

[Turgon9357]

Pretty sure Wizards realised the error of making spells with no saves with Otto's Irresistible Dance--they're not likely to do that again, and certainly not for a level 1 bard spell!

Now THAT is a backstory I'd like to see.

[Kish]

It doesn't say "as Confusion, except..."; it just says to refer to the Confusion spell to determine the effect (i.e., the random table).
And so it does not indicate in any way whether or not there is a saving throw--contrast Power Word Kill's "Saving Throw: None."

Clearly the solution is that the DM is supposed to roll a die to determine whether that individual casting of Lesser Confusion has a Fortitude, Reflex, or Will save.

[Dwy]

And so it does not indicate in any way whether or not there is a saving throw--contrast Power Word Kill's "Saving Throw: None."

Clearly the solution is that the DM is supposed to roll a die to determine whether that individual casting of Lesser Confusion has a Fortitude, Reflex, or Will save.
Nonono, the whole playing group rolls a d20 to determine their number of dice. Next each one rolls that many d3. The player who rolls the second lowest number, once the d3s have been multiplied by one another, proceeds to make a table to determine which player gets to choose which save will apply after the following y rounds of dice rolls are finished, where y is determined by the square of the choosing player's age.

Edit:
If the process at some point is brought to a halt due to confusion, the DM may choose to have the caster of Lesser Confusion suffer the effect of the spell. She meddled with powers that she didn't properly understand.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Are we talking about the same lesser confusion (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/confusionLesser.htm)?

I see no saving throw listed.

Link (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/powerWordBlind.htm) to an example of "Saving Throw: None" listed. If saves (etc.) are not there at all, the information exists, but is somewhere else.

[SpacemanSpif]

Hypothetically, I could see them taking out an explicit saving throw because there's an innate 1 in 10 chance for the spell to have no effect, as it only lasts one round, and the table includes a chance to act normally.

If this is their reasoning, that might also be why they don't say there's no saving throw, because the die roll to determine the effect is in some ways like a saving throw.

[factotum]

No, that makes no sense at all. A flat 1 in 10 chance for the spell to do nothing is not even approximately the same as a saving throw, which varies according to the level of the caster and the level of the spell's target--a 1 in 10 chance to avoid the effects when a level 1 caster is targeting a level 20 character would be ridiculously overpowered.

[Souhiro]

Keep in mind that with Lesser Confusion and a mid or low level party, you could end a battle with an epic guy, with some chances of being unscratched! Yes, it uses a Standard Action, so while you Confuse him (But just a bit) your pals attack him, no matter how epic your enemy is, his only chance is to get a good roll in his Confusion Check

Keep in mind, you have the same chances to "Distract" a goblin for a turn, that distracting Monster in the Darkness, or even the Tarrasque, for that matter! a 50%, even only a 30% of having the tarrasque "Doing Nothing" is a good deal for me! (You can throw some bags of rats into the Tarrasque's square, to increase this to a 80%)

That's the Controller Wizard objective: He doesn't win the battle, he makes the battle winable.

[Jay R]

I think lesser confusion is a disfunctionally written spell.

So what we have here is a minor confusion.

Well played, Wizards.

[Chronos]

Please note that I never said it makes sense for Lesser Confusion to not have a save, just that that's what the rules seem to imply. I agree, though, that this implication is due to bad editing, and that it would be perfectly reasonable for a DM to say "no, it has a save".

[Kish]

Please note that I never said it makes sense for Lesser Confusion to not have a save, just that that's what the rules seem to imply.
And I'm saying no, the rules are not unclear on how "there is no save" is indicated, and it's "Saving Throw: None," not a complete absence of text. If you take a "strictly RAW" view, you can justify saying the save for Lesser Confusion is undefined. Not that it is defined to nothing.

[Skorj]

Pretty sure Wizards realised the error of making spells with no saves with Otto's Irresistible Dance--they're not likely to do that again, and certainly not for a level 1 bard spell!

Hey now, Otto's was a TSR spell first. And in AD&D it made sense - by the time you could cast 8th level spells, nothing challenging would ever fail a save, but everything had magic resistance. (Actually, high levels spells were more for NPCs in Gygaxian D&D, and were mostly designed to be so powerful you could stop the party from killing your exposition NPC without killing the party.)

[F.Harr]

Gotta love the fact that Elan can neutralize TT's dinomount with one mediocre bard spell, but it took multiple wormholes and a Baleful Polymorph for Miron and Lauren to do the same to the Order.

Minimum effort, maximum result, for the win.

That IS pretty cool.

[Perseus]

That IS pretty cool.

Well, to actually get rid of it they needed a color spray. Lesser confusion would have been an easy fix.

[KillianHawkeye]

Please note that I never said it makes sense for Lesser Confusion to not have a save, just that that's what the rules seem to imply. I agree, though, that this implication is due to bad editing, and that it would be perfectly reasonable for a DM to say "no, it has a save".

If you take this as the implication, then you must also admit that the spell cannot be cast at all, because it lacks a "Casting Time" line.

[Porthos]

If one is going to be strict about Rules As Written, the spell is uncastable since it has no Casting Time listed. :smallsmile:

People here can't have it both ways. If they try to say it has no saving throw since it isn't listed, they also can't cast it since that isn't listed either.


ETA:::

*sees he forgot to read the next page of the thread*
*sees that his point was brought up*
*decides to keep the post here since it really needs to be re-inforced.* :smalltongue:

This will teach me to remeber to check page two before hitting "Submit Post". :smallsigh: :smallsigh: :smallredface: :smallsmile:

[Sunken Valley]

Fun Fact! In 3.0, Lesser Confusion wasn't even linked to Confusion. It was called Random Action!

[Flame of Anor]

Well, to actually get rid of it they needed a color spray. Lesser confusion would have been an easy fix.

That was a prismatic spray. It's basically color spray's big brother.

[zimmerwald1915]

That was a prismatic spray. It's basically color spray's big brother.
In theme, though nothing else. Color spray does not share a school with prismatic spray. The two spells don't do anything like the same thing.

[Orm-Embar]

If you take this as the implication, then you must also admit that the spell cannot be cast at all, because it lacks a "Casting Time" line.


If one is going to be strict about Rules As Written, the spell is uncastable since it has no Casting Time listed. :smallsmile:

People here can't have it both ways. If they try to say it has no saving throw since it isn't listed, they also can't cast it since that isn't listed either.


Actually it seems quite consistent with a rules lawyering munchkining position to say that if a spell can't be saved against if it lacks a saving throw listing, then it also takes no time at all to cast (free action!) if it lacks a casting time listing.

:vaarsuvius: "And that would be wrong."

[Porthos]

Actually it seems quite consistent with a rules lawyering position to say that if a spell can't be saved against if it lacks a saving throw listing, then it also takes no time at all to cast (free action!) if it lacks a casting time listing.

:vaarsuvius: "And that would be wrong."

That would be an example of munchkining, not rules lawyering. :smallwink:

The former is, of course, a fine and noble tradition. But depite popular notions to the contrary they aren't the same thing. :smalltongue:

[Bulldog Psion]

Wow, the description of Lesser Confusion is useless because they left half the most critical information out. :smallannoyed:

[Orm-Embar]

That would be an example of munchkining, not rules lawyering. :smallwink:

The former is, of course, a fine and noble tradition. But depite popular notions to the contrary they aren't the same thing. :smalltongue:

I guess I would accept that. Like debating actions versus alignments, I suspect the meaning of the term and whether it's good or evil often depends on the eye of the beholder. :smallwink:

[KillianHawkeye]

I guess I would accept that. Like debating actions versus alignments, I suspect the meaning of the term and whether it's good or evil often depends on the eye of the beholder. :smallwink:

Woah, wait, we do NOT want to get Beholders involved in this! :smallwink::smallbiggrin:

[Porthos]

Woah, wait, we do NOT want to get Beholders involved in this! :smallwink::smallbiggrin:

Yeah. For one thing, they're Product Identity. And I don't think I want Jones and Rodriguez snoopin' 'round these parts. :smalltongue:

[Kornaki]

Actually it seems quite consistent with a rules lawyering position to say that if a spell can't be saved against if it lacks a saving throw listing, then it also takes no time at all to cast (free action!) if it lacks a casting time listing.

:vaarsuvius: "And that would be wrong."

No, proper rules lawyering would be to read this page

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm

and then head to the old thread debating whether spellcasting (not the spell itself, but the act of casting the spell) is an extraordinary, supernatural or natural ability (presumably hoping its natural as both extraodinary and supernatural abilities require a standard action if no time is specified)

[Snails]

Hey now, Otto's was a TSR spell first. And in AD&D it made sense - by the time you could cast 8th level spells, nothing challenging would ever fail a save, but everything had magic resistance. (Actually, high levels spells were more for NPCs in Gygaxian D&D, and were mostly designed to be so powerful you could stop the party from killing your exposition NPC without killing the party.)

Good points.

Furthermore, the pace of combat was slower measured per round in 1e/2e. Losing d4+1 rounds of actions was not necessarily that big a deal.

In fact, if the effect is only 2 rounds (which happens 25% of the time), that might be rated a near failure, in the eyes of the wizard. Giving up a wizard spell action and an 8th level slot in the middle of an ugly furball fight so that one enemy loses 2 actions? Not so good.

Maze was usually better in 1e/2e, unless you knew your target was very smart. Maze was a ranged spell and harder to fix.