Hallow + Delay Death = super-stronghold defense?

[Jowgen]

Build your own personal stronghold of up to 40 ft in radius, cast Hallow at the center and choose to affix a Delay Death spell upon it. You make it so that only your chosen allies (e.g. worshippers of yourself) benefit from the spell.

Now, for the next year, no matter how deep into negative HP any of your allies go while inside the temple, they simply will not die. Sure, they can still be death-effected, ability-drain-killed or disintegrated; but still. Add the die hard feat, beastland ferocity spell, or headband of ferocity item (as per regular delay death shenanigans) and your allies simply can not be stabbed to death as they defend the place. This is a huge advantage.

Conversely, if you're DMing and your party's primary thing is HP damage; they are utterly screwed lest they figure out the effect and dispel it appropriately.

Speaking off, what kind of dispel would you have to use to dispel the hallow-tied effect? A targeted dispel on a single creature affected wouldn't do it as far as I can tell. An area dispel that includes the emanation center, or targeted at the emanation center maybe?

[Flickerdart]

This is precisely why hallow has a shortlist of eligible spells.

[Zaq]

A Truenamer using Reversed Spell Rebirth could dispel the whole shebang. If the Hallow was very carefully crafted to only apply to the allies of the caster, you probably couldn't use the bunny trick (you'd have to actually target one of the caster's allies), but it would still work. What's more, Reversed Spell Rebirth doesn't care what CL your Hallow effect was at. Get someone using Circle Magic to cast it. Get Boccob himself to cast it. Doesn't matter. It's only as strong as the Truespeak DC of the weakest person affected by the spell.

As far as more traditional dispels go? I think you're in "ask your GM" territory. I've seen a relatively convincing argument that dispelling one target of a multi-target spell (like Haste) dispels the whole thing, since Dispel Magic says "the spell ends" and not "the spell ends on that target" (I'm too lazy to cite the exact wording right now, but that's the gist of it). Basically, you don't have a separate Haste effect on Joe and a separate Haste effect on Sue and a separate Haste effect on Fred—you have one Haste effect that happens to be targeting all of those people, so you only have to get rid of it once and then it's gone. Hallow's kind of a weird effect, so it might be different, but I think there's a few different arguments to be made about it.

But yeah. Doing hardcore shutdowns of big spell effects without giving a damn about the source of the spell is actually one of the few things that Truenamers can do disturbingly well. (Mostly due to poor wording, but I take my victories where I can get them.)

[ericgrau]

Yeah but even with delay death it's not extraordinarily broken. Compare the cost of getting all followers to take the endurance + diehard feats vs casting a couple dispels until one sticks. This is precisely why I think dispel is normally over-rated: bad trade-off. In this case it's a super obviously good trade-off and now all your followers are behind by 2 feats.

I mean a dispel on the hallow itself btw.

The only annoying thing is if you didn't prepare dispel that day or, more likely at level 9+, your first 1-2 dispels fail and you didn't prepare another. Especially if the hallow caster level is 11+ since dispel caps at 10 and greater dispel takes more resources to prep. Or if the CL was cheesed into the stratosphere. Now you're trading a couple follower feats for immunity to hp damage which is a little OP. But followers can still be disabled with both magical and mundane methods. Plus since they can't leave the hallow, foes who hit, run and heal up are nearly as well off as your followers. Then you get a stalemate until enemies figure it out and start disabling your followers and/or forcing your followers outside with grapples and so on. And that's the way the non-casters do it who would normally attack hp.

[Pinkie Pyro]

This is precisely why hallow has a shortlist of eligible spells.

About that:

Spell effects that may be tied to a hallowed site include

Include, not are.

there is no text limiting what spells can be added to hallow, thus any spell can be added, it was giving a list of suggestions.

[Chronos]

Well, shucks, then, don't add it to Hallow, just add it to a Silent Image instead. That doesn't say you can't add Delay Death to it, either, and it's a lot cheaper.

[Flickerdart]

thus any spell can be added
If any spell could be added, it would say that. Instead, it gives a list of spells that may be tied to a hallowed site, which at least strongly implies that there are spells that may not be tied to a hallowed site.

[Jowgen]

If any spell could be added, it would say that. Instead, it gives a list of spells that may be tied to a hallowed site, which at least strongly implies that there are spells that may not be tied to a hallowed site.

According to stronghold builders guidebook page 55, the spells listed in the description are not exhaustive. Specificlally it states: Best of all, you can fix a programmable spell to the site with a duration of one year. [...] Some common choices (and the cost for an NPC spellcaster to provide them) are listed below.

So yeah, in the absence of other rules on what spells qualify and which don't, one defaults to the "similar" effects roles. Buffs with a duration or area effect with duration seem to fit the bill. Delay Death qualifies.

[ericgrau]

"Spell effects that may be tied to a hallowed site include..."

"May" and "include" mean that there may be other spells but they probably aren't all spells. The list is so long already that those are probably all the core spells that may be tied to a hallow, and someone needs to make additional lists for non-core spells. Which means the DM needs to do it. Is delay death reasonable for him to include? Maybe it is, but who knows what will happen, or what would happen if WotC made official lists.

This now starts to go a little outside the realm of optimization because if it's way too good then the DM may say "lol no". OTOH, maybe it's merely good and not way too good.

[tiercel]

Targeted Dispel

One object, creature, or spell is the target of the dispel magic spell.

...

Area Dispel

When dispel magic is used in this way, the spell affects everything within a 20-foot radius....

For each ongoing area or effect spell whose point of origin is within the area of the dispel magic spell, you can make a dispel check to dispel the spell.




So Dispel Magic can either specifically target the Hallow spell effect itself, as long as you know it's there to target, or you can catch its point of origin within the Dispel's area. This part - how Dispel interacts with Hallow - seems fairly clear.

Additionally, Hallow/Unhallow is an emanation from a touched point, so one counter is breaking line of effect from the point of origin, which leads to potentially zany counters: an unkillable squad of defenders, covered in otherwise-mortal wounds, being defeated by throwing an empty canvas Official Party Loot Sack over the statue of EvilGod.

Whether you can stick any old spell you want onto Hallow is... less clear. I'm inclined to believe "no," but could see room for DM judgment call there.

[ace rooster]

About that:


Include, not are.

there is no text limiting what spells can be added to hallow, thus any spell can be added, it was giving a list of suggestions.

There is no statement limiting when you can park on a sign that says "free parking 5-9", but good luck arguing that one with the traffic warden.

This is what is meant by "exception proves the rule". Explicitly stating a list of things that are included generally implies that most things are not. I read it as suggesting that it does not apply to the majority of spells, but that DMs are free to add to the list as they see fit. Definately not clear, but this would be my reading.

Incidently the list included does not contain any spells with duration less than 1 min per level, and I would be reluctant to break that pattern. From memory delay death is 1 round per level, but correct me if wrong.

I was going to point out that allowing any spell also allows widened hallow incendiary clouds; and use this as a reason not to apply hallow to any spell, but that actually sounds so metal that I would probably allow it.

[Chronos]

Actually, you can't dispel Hallow itself, since it has a duration of instantaneous. You might, however, be able to dispel the spell tied to it.

...And I just realized that in 3.5, there's nothing preventing you from casting both Hallow and Unhallow on the same piece of ground, with both associated spell effects.

[Jowgen]

Incidently the list included does not contain any spells with duration less than 1 min per level, and I would be reluctant to break that pattern. From memory delay death is 1 round per level, but correct me if wrong.

Cause fear is 1d4 or 1 round, Detect X is concentration (who'd be getting the info here? :smallannoyed:) Discern lies is round/level, Dispel Magic is instantaneous and Protection from Energy is dis-chargeable.

Also, on this note, I don't think the Hallow itself is dispel-able, as it's instantaneous. Only the tied spell is. There is also an FAQ to that end, for what that's worth...

[SangoProduction]

...And I just realized that in 3.5, there's nothing preventing you from casting both Hallow and Unhallow on the same piece of ground, with both associated spell effects.
I think the spell is preventing you from doing that.

Hallow counters but does not dispel unhallow.

[Jormengand]

I think the spell is preventing you from doing that.

That clause means that you specifically can cast them both on the same place, though you can also choose to use one as a counterspell against the other.



Also, the fun thing about reversed spell rebirth is that it can end even instantaneous duration spells. True creation? Gone. Hallow? Gone. Fireball? Pushing it, and why are you not just using word of nurturing, but there's an argument for it.

[Chronos]

But those spells are already gone, even before you use the reversed spell rebirth.

[Cosi]

Also, the fun thing about reversed spell rebirth is that it can end even instantaneous duration spells. True creation? Gone. Hallow? Gone. Fireball? Pushing it, and why are you not just using word of nurturing, but there's an argument for it.

No, it can't. There's no spell to dispel. The utterance doesn't do anything.

[Jormengand]

No, it can't. There's no spell to dispel. The utterance doesn't do anything.

It's not trying to dispel them. Plus, if there's no spell there, how is it still doing anything? You can't say "Oh, my hallow spell doesn't actually exist", because it clearly does exist.

[Cosi]

It's not trying to dispel them. Plus, if there's no spell there, how is it still doing anything? You can't say "Oh, my hallow spell doesn't actually exist", because it clearly does exist.

What the hell do you think it's trying to do? The literal and exact text of Spell Rebirth (Reversed) is "This utterance dispels the spell with the highest caster level affecting the target." Well, literal and exact minus the emphasis added for clarity. It uses the word "dispel", what could it possibly be doing other than dispelling the spell? Making it breakfast in bed?

[Jormengand]

What the hell do you think it's trying to do? The literal and exact text of Spell Rebirth (Reversed) is "This utterance dispels the spell with the highest caster level affecting the target." Well, literal and exact minus the emphasis added for clarity. It uses the word "dispel", what could it possibly be doing other than dispelling the spell? Making it breakfast in bed?

Aaah, sorry, this is me mixing it up with Truename Dispel which uses the word end rather than dispel. You are right, I'm misremembering. Sorry. You don't need a mid-level truenamer, you need a high-level wizard/sorcerer with inexplicable truespeak ranks.

EDIT: (It does actually mention the word dispel, but it specifies that what it's actually doing is ending... it's really badly written, which is about par for the course in Tome of Magic).

[daremetoidareyo]

Yeah but even with delay death it's not extraordinarily broken. Compare the cost of getting all followers to take the endurance + diehard feats vs casting a couple dispels until one sticks. This is precisely why I think dispel is normally over-rated: bad trade-off. In this case it's a super obviously good trade-off and now all your followers are behind by 2 feats.

Followers? Surely you mean your contingent of hireling experts who pimped their handle animal high, each of which has 3 to 4 invincible boars or dire boars as guards. No need to waste feats when skill + mundane animal purchase can do it.

Boarnado!

[heavyfuel]

Assuming Fickledart's interpretation is wrong, what would be good spells to Hollow in Pathfinder? I don't think there's a Delay Death equivalent

[Telok]

I'm somewhat amazed that this has gone on so long and nobody mentioned the Acorn of Far Travel cheese yet.

[Âmesang]

I think the spell is preventing you from doing that.
Think it'd be a decent houserule to say they do dispel each other? It seems silly to me that (more-or-less) equal parts good and evil don't cancel each other out in this particular instance.

[Chronos]

In 3.0, they did. Which was sort of dysfunctional for an instantaneous-duration spell, but I think we all understood what they meant.

[Âmesang]

Of course that also leads me to wonder why those particular spells have an instantaneous duration, anyway? :smalltongue:

[Jowgen]

Of course that also leads me to wonder why those particular spells have an instantaneous duration, anyway? :smalltongue:

I think it was meant specifically to make them non-dispellable. After all, there not much holiness to a holy site if its holiness can just be wiped away by a puny anti-magic spell.

[Necroticplague]

Of course that also leads me to wonder why those particular spells have an instantaneous duration, anyway? :smalltongue:

Because their effect is one and done. The effect of the spell is simply to curse/bless the area. Once the spell is done with, the property of the cursed/blessed land is entirely divoriced from the Unhallow or Hallow spell that created it (and presumably, Unhallowed of Hallowed areas can exist without the use of the spells).

[tiercel]

Because their effect is one and done. The effect of the spell is simply to curse/bless the area. Once the spell is done with, the property of the cursed/blessed land is entirely divoriced from the Unhallow or Hallow spell that created it (and presumably, Unhallowed of Hallowed areas can exist without the use of the spells).

This seems bizarre to me, given that the spells are Emanations from the touched point. An Emanation "functions like a Burst spell, except that the effect continues to radiate from the point of origin for the duration of the spell." Since the duration of the spells are Instantaneous, then why isn't the area just a Burst?

How does a purely magical spell effect exist without the spell existing? (Is this getting into "my magical ball of magical force can kill magic-'immune' creatures like golems inside of 'anti-magic' fields" territory?)

Assuming that "counter" means "negate," the only way to get rid of a Hallow/Unhallow effect (not spell, since it doesn't last) is with its opposite? --Which takes 24 hours, which means it can't be unless the area is cleared of defenders first, effectively. (Barring shenanigans for casting 24-hour-casting-time spells in substantially less time than 24 hours.) --Also, barring Disjunction, since that targets "magical effects," though if Disjunction is in play your game has other problems.

Or maybe, IRON! HEART! SURGE!

[Jowgen]

This seems bizarre to me, given that the spells are Emanations from the touched point. An Emanation "functions like a Burst spell, except that the effect continues to radiate from the point of origin for the duration of the spell." Since the duration of the spells are Instantaneous, then why isn't the area just a Burst?

It gets weirder, actually. The range of Hallow is Touch. "A spell’s range is the maximum distance from you that the spell’s effect can occur [...]". If we consider the hallowing effect itself to be an emanation, that would be utterly dysfunctional, as the emanation couldn't extend beyond the touch range.

My personal solution:

The hallowing effect is a touch effect that affects one building, structure or site that you touch, making it holy ground. This makes sense, as otherwise temples could never be more than 40 ft in radius. This is the instantaneous effect with a range of touch that can only be countered by touching the same site and casting unhallow.

The affixed spell is the emanation effect, which emanates from the hallowed building/structure. Whatever spell is fixed gets duration one year and an area of 40 ft emanation. Anything that has line of effect to any part of the structure and is within 40 ft gets affected.

The one thing that remains screwy in all this is the affixing of instantaneous effects. According to the FAQ, the affixed spell triggers ever time a target enters the area; but that seems rather broken.