Calm Emotions and Barbarian Rage/Frenzy

[RedMage125]

Here's a question...

Calm Emotions has a duration of Concentration (max 1 round/level). It says that morale bonuses are suppressed during the duration, but that barbarian rage and bardic Inspire Courage are "negated". That means they're just over, right? That's how I read it. As a side note, ending the confused condition works the same way, yes?

So if a Frenzied Berserker is both raging and frenzied, and fails his save against a Calm Emotions spell he is now exhausted, right? And even if the cleric who cast it has his concentration interrupted, the barbarian remains exhausted, as his rage and frenzy are now OVER, yes?

One of my players is contesting this interpretation, I was looking for some support that I am correct.

[finaldooms]

That should be right, it doesnt say surpressed but negated then they end and the barb in question takes the penalty associated with rage ending ( exhausted) ...i had to use that gimmick to kill a frenzied berzerk since he had the end teir ( deathless frenzy i belive) he was at- 200 hp and my BBEG was freaking out and cast it while saying chill out

[Necroticplague]

Here's a question...

Calm Emotions has a duration of Concentration (max 1 round/level). It says that morale bonuses are suppressed during the duration, but that barbarian rage and bardic Inspire Courage are "negated". That means they're just over, right? That's how I read it. As a side note, ending the confused condition works the same way, yes?

So if a Frenzied Berserker is both raging and frenzied, and fails his save against a Calm Emotions spell he is now exhausted, right? And even if the cleric who cast it has his concentration interrupted, the barbarian remains exhausted, as his rage and frenzy are now OVER, yes?

One of my players is contesting this interpretation, I was looking for some support that I am correct.

The Rage ability is not the benefits of a rage, but the ability to start it. So negating the Rage ability just means they can't fly into a rage, not that their current rage is calmed. Likewise, Calm Emotions doesn't call out Frenzy, so it's a bit of a stretch to say Calm Emotions has any effect on a Frenzy (though if you do Calm a Frenzied person, I wonder whether Calm Emotion's 'Creatures so affected cannot take violent actions ' or Frenzy's 'During a frenzy, the frenzied berserker must attack those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability. ' would take precedence).

[KillingAScarab]

I think the spell description may be purposefully vague to allow for different interpretations. That said, I interpret it differently then Necroticplague.


The Rage ability is not the benefits of a rage, but the ability to start it. So negating the Rage ability just means they can't fly into a rage, not that their current rage is calmed.The opening sentence of the description states that it "calms agitated creatures." I think rage counts as "agitated." The sentence which ends with stating rage is negated also pertains to inspire courage. Interestingly, inspire courage only confers morale bonuses, while rage confers one morale bonus, two untyped bonuses and one untyped penalty.


Likewise, Calm Emotions doesn't call out Frenzy, so it's a bit of a stretch to say Calm Emotions has any effect on a Frenzy (though if you do Calm a Frenzied person, I wonder whether Calm Emotion's 'Creatures so affected cannot take violent actions ' or Frenzy's 'During a frenzy, the frenzied berserker must attack those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability. ' would take precedence).Frenzy didn't exist when the Player's Handbook was written. I would argue that a frenzy is entirely the product of emotional state. In my view, once you calm emotions, a frenzy cannot persist, even if you were to for some reason try to be frenzied and take no actions (violent or otherwise).

Wasn't asked for, but I also think I would rule that calm emotions would end the rage of a badger (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/badger.htm), which otherwise fights to the death. Sure, calm animals (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/calmAnimals.htm) does exist, but that one may not be on your player's spell list.

[animewatcha]

Exact text from srd of spell
This spell calms agitated creatures. You have no control over the affected creatures, but calm emotions can stop raging creatures from fighting or joyous ones from reveling. Creatures so affected cannot take violent actions (although they can defend themselves) or do anything destructive. Any aggressive action against or damage dealt to a calmed creature immediately breaks the spell on all calmed creatures.

This spell automatically suppresses (but does not dispel) any morale bonuses granted by spells such as bless, good hope, and rage, as well as negating a bard’s ability to inspire courage or a barbarian’s rage ability. It also suppresses any fear effects and removes the confused condition from all targets. While the spell lasts, a suppressed spell or effect has no effect. When the calm emotions spell ends, the original spell or effect takes hold of the creature again, provided that its duration has not expired in the meantime.

So rage pops and gets durations while does other things like charging, full attacking etc. Calm emotions pops, bye bye rage. Inspire courage. If bard is stopping immediately after start ( lingering song, blade that keeps music going, etc. ) then calm emotions can pull immediate stop. However, if bard is constantly singing, playing, etc. kinda like channeling a spell in other RPGs, then same inspire courage takes effect back when calm emotions stops.

[RedMage125]

Up until now, I have been allowing Calm Emotions to end frenzy and rage. The party cleric has a wand of it, and he readies it when combat is just about over.

Nothing about frenzy says that the barbarian loses the ability to distinguish friend from foe during a frenzy, UNLESS all enemies are defeated and he fails his save to stop frenzy, at which point, only the target of his aggression is now perceived as a target. As long as the cleric isn't the one being attacked, the berserker can always choose to voluntarily fails his save against the Calm Emotions.

[INoKnowNames]

By the way the spell works, I was under the assumption that all benefits of that invocation of the rage/frenzy ability were only temporarily deactivated, either until the rage/frenzy ended or until the spell lifted, which ever happened first (and in the case of the rage/frenzy ending, that would mean they never came back until the next use). Though I am of the mindset at least that Calm Emotions would pseudo-counter Frenzy. Nothing says that Frenzy offers any protection against Enchantments or the like.

An interesting note that Calm Emotions can allow for the effect (the Rage or Frenzy) to continue if the duration persists beyond the Spell's number of rounds. "While the spell lasts, a suppressed spell or effect has no effect. When the calm emotions spell ends, the original spell or effect takes hold of the creature again, provided that its duration has not expired in the meantime." So depending on how long the rage lasts, they could very well go back to being angry. Particulally since "Any aggressive action against or damage dealt to a calmed creature immediately breaks the spell on all calmed creatures."

It's actually for that reason that I prefer my Clerics and Bards to upgrade to Dragon's of Faerun's Pacification Spell for emergencies. A little closer ranged, but doesn't offer a save (if someone's mind-controlled your party's Berserker, the ability to -FORCE- him to stop is excellent), and lasts for minutes rather than rounds (which is definitely long enough for the Frenzied Berserker to calm down).

[RedMage125]

The Rage ability is not the benefits of a rage, but the ability to start it. So negating the Rage ability just means they can't fly into a rage, not that their current rage is calmed. Likewise, Calm Emotions doesn't call out Frenzy, so it's a bit of a stretch to say Calm Emotions has any effect on a Frenzy (though if you do Calm a Frenzied person, I wonder whether Calm Emotion's 'Creatures so affected cannot take violent actions ' or Frenzy's 'During a frenzy, the frenzied berserker must attack those she perceives as foes to the best of her ability. ' would take precedence).
That's exactly why it ends the frenzy. And remember, one can always CHOOSE to fail a saving throw.

I don't know about that interpretation of the rage ability. If a barbarian is IN a rage and gets hit with Calm Emotions, I think his rage is over, not just suppressed. A rage spell would be suppressed and then resume after the Calm ended, but I think the rage would just be over. And it's only once per encounter.
>:)


By the way the spell works, I was under the assumption that all benefits of that invocation of the rage/frenzy ability were only temporarily deactivated, either until the rage/frenzy ended or until the spell lifted, which ever happened first (and in the case of the rage/frenzy ending, that would mean they never came back until the next use). Though I am of the mindset at least that Calm Emotions would pseudo-counter Frenzy. Nothing says that Frenzy offers any protection against Enchantments or the like.

An interesting note that Calm Emotions can allow for the effect (the Rage or Frenzy) to continue if the duration persists beyond the Spell's number of rounds. "While the spell lasts, a suppressed spell or effect has no effect. When the calm emotions spell ends, the original spell or effect takes hold of the creature again, provided that its duration has not expired in the meantime." So depending on how long the rage lasts, they could very well go back to being angry. Particulally since "Any aggressive action against or damage dealt to a calmed creature immediately breaks the spell on all calmed creatures."

It's actually for that reason that I prefer my Clerics and Bards to upgrade to Dragon's of Faerun's Pacification Spell for emergencies. A little closer ranged, but doesn't offer a save (if someone's mind-controlled your party's Berserker, the ability to -FORCE- him to stop is excellent), and lasts for minutes rather than rounds (which is definitely long enough for the Frenzied Berserker to calm down).

The text doesn't really support that, though.
This spell automatically suppresses (but
does not dispel) any morale bonuses
granted by spells such as bless, good hope,
and rage, as well as negating a bard’s ability
to inspire courage or a barbarian’s rage
ability. It also suppresses any fear effects
and removes the confused condition from
all targets. While the spell lasts, a suppressed
spell or effect has no effect. When
the calm emotions spell ends, the original
spell or effect takes hold of the creature
again, provided that its duration has not
expired in the meantime.

It explicitly uses the word "suppress" for spells, stating that they are not dispelled and that the spells resume effect when the Calm ends. But then uses "negating" for a barbarian's rage. It likewise "suppresses" any fear effects, but "removes" the confused condition.

Only the spells or effects which were "suppressed" resume effect. A Barbarian's Rage was not "supressed", it was "negated".

This is the crux of my point. I think it's only temporary for all spells and fear effects, but once concentration (or the duration) ends, they resume. But a Bard must use another Inspire Courage use to grant the bonus to that target again, and the Barbarian is just kind of hosed.

[Pleh]

Reading the srd text, I would say that calm emotions can't touch Frenzy by RAW, but any GM would be well advised to consider it a rage type ability by RAI, so it's not wrong to rule that way. Kind of a house preference thing.

I can see good arguments for the spell not negating frenzy, though. Rage is definitely in the category of an emotion, but if we consider frenzies we see in nature with sharks and wolves, it might be less of an emotion and more of an instinct. Are wolves angry when they go into a feeding frenzy? The very fact that a berserker can't simply end their frenzy voluntarily speaks to how it is different than just being super angry.

Is it an emotion? Not in the traditional sense by any means. Emotions are instinctual, but are all instincts emotional? Frenzy may just not be the same kind of thing as rage.

Reading the SRD text, I can see another interpretation. It may not be the best, but I could see it working:

Spells, effects, and bonuses from rage and IC are suppressed (which means they turn back on if their duration outlasts the duration of calm emotions).

Since negating IC and Rage turns off the ability to trigger IC and Rage, but only suppress the benefits, bards and barbarians can't activate new iterations of these abilities (attempts to do so fizzle) for the duration of the spell, but they can attempt new iterations after the spell ends.

[RedMage125]

Reading the srd text, I would say that calm emotions can't touch Frenzy by RAW, but any GM would be well advised to consider it a rage type ability by RAI, so it's not wrong to rule that way. Kind of a house preference thing.

I can see good arguments for the spell not negating frenzy, though. Rage is definitely in the category of an emotion, but if we consider frenzies we see in nature with sharks and wolves, it might be less of an emotion and more of an instinct. Are wolves angry when they go into a feeding frenzy? The very fact that a berserker can't simply end their frenzy voluntarily speaks to how it is different than just being super angry.

Is it an emotion? Not in the traditional sense by any means. Emotions are instinctual, but are all instincts emotional? Frenzy may just not be the same kind of thing as rage.

Regardless, if he voluntarily fails his save, he cannot attack anyone. Since his ability to attack is stymied, his frenzy ends for all intents and purposes.


Reading the SRD text, I can see another interpretation. It may not be the best, but I could see it working:

Spells, effects, and bonuses from rage and IC are suppressed (which means they turn back on if their duration outlasts the duration of calm emotions).

Except the wording of the spell does not say IC and rage are "suppressed". It says morale bonuses from SPELLS (to include the spell Rage) are suppressed, which means they resume if their duration outlasts the Calm Emotions spell.

IC and barbarian rage are NEGATED. So where does that leave us?


Since negating IC and Rage turns off the ability to trigger IC and Rage, but only suppress the benefits, bards and barbarians can't activate new iterations of these abilities (attempts to do so fizzle) for the duration of the spell, but they can attempt new iterations after the spell ends.

The bard can, but barbarian rage AND frenzy both limit the activation to once per encounter.

This is kind of a big deal. The party (16th level and quite powerful) is going up against a group of enemies who have used divination to be QUITE familiar with their tactics, and are led by an 18th level Cleric of Vecna (currently the possessor of the Hand).

[Pleh]

Regardless, if he voluntarily fails his save, he cannot attack anyone. Since his ability to attack is stymied, his frenzy ends for all intents and purposes.

This is very wrong.

Not that he can't voluntarily fail his save against the spell, but the spell only restrains him and fails to end his frenzy

If frenzy is not negated, but he is prevented from making attacks or destructive actions (note this goes away if the berserker is attacked during the spell) then the frenzy resumes if the spell ends before the frenzy has reached the end of its duration. The berserker still has to make a Will Save to end it early since the spell did not make the actual frenzy end.

A frenzied berserker under the effect of calm emotions, by RAW, still cannot distinguish friend frome foe and still has frenzy bonuses (such as strength bonus). If calm emotions breaks while frenzy is active, frenzy resumes.

[RedMage125]

This is very wrong.

Not that he can't voluntarily fail his save against the spell, but the spell only restrains him and fails to end his frenzy

If frenzy is not negated, but he is prevented from making attacks or destructive actions (note this goes away if the berserker is attacked during the spell) then the frenzy resumes if the spell ends before the frenzy has reached the end of its duration. The berserker still has to make a Will Save to end it early since the spell did not make the actual frenzy end.

A frenzied berserker under the effect of calm emotions, by RAW, still cannot distinguish friend frome foe and still has frenzy bonuses (such as strength bonus). If calm emotions breaks while frenzy is active, frenzy resumes.

The Calm Emotions just needs to exceed the frenzy by the cleric concentrating on it. Since combat is over, this is a non-issue.

And NOTHING in Frenzy says he "cannot distinguish friend from foe". In fact, since he can continue to ONLY target enemies while there ARE enemies, I would say that the rules are quite clear that he CAN make the distinction. ONLY when there are no enemies left does he attack allies. So, the way I rule it, as long as the cleric isn't the one he's attacking, he can choose to voluntarily fail his save.

[Pleh]

The Calm Emotions just needs to exceed the frenzy by the cleric concentrating on it. Since combat is over, this is a non-issue.

Theoretically, yes, but you aren't account for situations where the party missed that one ninja kobold who stayed out of sight and pops back in to snipe the barbarian and then pop off again (be even easier for an enemy wizard to scry in from afar and give a quick fireball burst on the barbarian). He doesn't even have to deal damage, since any aggressive action dispels the effect.

Fringe case scenario, to be sure, but it's the exception that makes the rule. We're basically dealing with the question of the Hulk as a member of the Avengers (and the evil wizard is Loki). Sure, they use Calm Emotions, too, and Banner is basically voluntarily failing his will save against it, but let's not forget that Calm Emotions doesn't turn off Frenzy at any point. Just suppresses it until the duration ends. ANY aggressive action from ANY creature towards the barbarian or ANY damage dealt to the barbarian (such as continual damage from a bleed or fire effect) prevents Calm Emotions from doing the suppressing thing.


And NOTHING in Frenzy says he "cannot distinguish friend from foe". In fact, since he can continue to ONLY target enemies while there ARE enemies, I would say that the rules are quite clear that he CAN make the distinction. ONLY when there are no enemies left does he attack allies. So, the way I rule it, as long as the cleric isn't the one he's attacking, he can choose to voluntarily fail his save.

True, I misremembered the text where it was actually saying,
She must then attack the nearest creature (determine randomly if several potential foes are equidistant) and fight that opponent without regard to friendship, innocence, or health (the target’s or her own).

I apologize for my mistake there.

[Vaern]

However, if bard is constantly singing, playing, etc. kinda like channeling a spell in other RPGs, then same inspire courage takes effect back when calm emotions stops.
This little bit here made me read a bit closer and see a different perspective on this issue. The bard wouldn't be able to do that.
The spell doesn't say that it negates the effects of Inspire Courage. It negates the bard's ability to Inspire Courage that is negated. That bard could play until the spell was cast, but then he would be unable to continue.
The bard's ability to Inspire would be negated. The effect will linger -though suppressed - an additional 5 rounds, but the bard can not use the his ability to Inspire until the spell's duration ends.

Likewise, it says that a barbarian's rage ability is negated. It could be argued that the effects a rage that is already in use might be suppressed for the remainder of its duration, but an attempt for a barbarian to use his ability to begin a rage while affected by Calm Emotions would be negated.

[RedMage125]

This little bit here made me read a bit closer and see a different perspective on this issue. The bard wouldn't be able to do that.
The spell doesn't say that it negates the effects of Inspire Courage. It negates the bard's ability to Inspire Courage that is negated. That bard could play until the spell was cast, but then he would be unable to continue.
The bard's ability to Inspire would be negated. The effect will linger -though suppressed - an additional 5 rounds, but the bard can not use the his ability to Inspire until the spell's duration ends.
But IC is not what is suppressed, it is negated. The only things suppressed are fear effects and any morale bonuses from spells.


Likewise, it says that a barbarian's rage ability is negated. It could be argued that the effects a rage that is already in use might be suppressed for the remainder of its duration, but an attempt for a barbarian to use his ability to begin a rage while affected by Calm Emotions would be negated.
I don't think one could argue for the effect of rage being "suppressed", since it is not a SPELL.

It also doesn't say that the barbarian's ability to start a new rage is negated, it says his "rage ability" is negated. Under the class heading, the "rage" ability includes the stat bonuses.

I think that IC, barbarian rage, and confusion statuses just END, and remain over when the Calm Emotions spell ends.