Rary's Telepathic Bond and Teleport Combination

[JoeMac307]

My PCs want to use the 5th Level Teleport spell to teleport to the childhood home of one of the party members, which is about 900 miles away from their current location. Besides the party member that grew up there, none of the other PCs has ever been to or seen the party member's childhood home, or even visited the party member's country of origin.

Could the party spell caster (10th Level Wizard) cast Rary's Telepathic Bond on the party member in question (who is a willing participant) and use it to become familiar with the location - in other words can you use Rary's Telepathic Bond to pass along mental images vivid enough for someone else to become familiar with the location you are picturing in your mind? Would you say that by picturing their childhood home, which they last visited about a year ago, the party member in question could make the Wizard familiar enough with the location to attempt to use Teleport to travel there, and if so, would you say that the Wizard is now "Very familiar" with the location, as the character passing along the mental images spent many years living there?

[Lazymancer]

I'd say - no. Telepathic Bond doesn't transmit images, only thoughts. I might allow someone using actual "brainscan" effects like Mindrape to get "viewed once" for location, but not Telepathic Bond and most certainly not "very familiar". It's not even Dominate which gives rough description, rather than the current sensory input of the dominated.

Assuming the Wizard in question isn't sufficiently hardcore to Teleport to the low orbit, take a look at the destination, and cast silenced Teleport there before he goes unconscious, can't he simply Scry on someone that should be in the location to get a look around? Hearing about person from the party member is good enough for an attempt (especially, if target is sleeping - i.e. willing).

And why such hurry? You can just ride there - with Phantom Steed it shouldn't take more than a week. At CL 10 it can even move over water.

[JoeMac307]

Thank you for the reply. They could try to Scry, although if that goees sideways could that announce their arrival? They aren't very welcome right now. The hurry is because the party member's parents have been kidnapped and time is running out on the ransom demand.

[Lazymancer]

They could try to Scry, although if that goees sideways could that announce their arrival? They aren't very welcome right now.
There are four ways it can "go sideways":

1) Scryer's head explodes.
In my opinion, it is extremely unlikely for a commoner to hang out with violently paranoid (and homicidally optimized) Wizards.

2) Scrying is noticed.
This requires target to be within Detect Scrying field or some equivalent mid-level effect. In my opinion, it is still very unlikely (as in "significantly below 1%") for a commoner to hang out with mid-level casters.

3) Someone notices sensor.
This is the most probable (but still unlikely) scenario: there is someone with Int 12+ in the vicinity (NPCs usually have this Int if they are old), who can attempt DC 20 Int check and notice sensor. If this attempt is successful - sensor is noticed, but who is Scrying or from where is unknown.

4) Target resists Scrying.
Commoner that is awake and had resisted Scrying will get a *ping* of some suppressed malign interference, which he will probably not even identify as succeeding at Will saving throw (as I said: little to no interaction with magic). He will not know that someone had just attempted Scrying at him.


Imo, the only problem is stealthily teleporting in.



The hurry is because the party member's parents have been kidnapped and time is running out on the ransom demand.
If you threaten someone with a gun, you'd better be ready to use it. Now that you've went to the dark side and accepted the Holy Railroad as your Lord and Saviour, are you ready to have PC's parents gruesomely murdered?

[Endarire]

Scry & Die is known that for a reason: Scry the area (or someone in the area) to learn what's there then teleport in!

OotS has a comic where Xykon mentions Scry & Fry. It's effectively the same thing.

[KillianHawkeye]

FYI: Scrying isn't any more effective against a sleeping target than a waking one.

It (obviously) doesn't require a willing target, and sleeping creatures still make saving throws. When it says that unconscious creatures are "considered willing", it doesn't mean that they're intentionally giving up their saving throw, only that you can use a spell like teleport on them.

[Lazymancer]

FYI: Scrying isn't any more effective against a sleeping target than a waking one.

It (obviously) doesn't require a willing target, and sleeping creatures still make saving throws. When it says that unconscious creatures are "considered willing", it doesn't mean that they're intentionally giving up their saving throw, only that you can use a spell like teleport on them.
That is not what RAW says and I'm not aware of any errata or clarification on this matter. Was there such a thing?

While context might suggest that this "considered willing" bit refers only to the targets of "willing only" spells - and it is entirely reasonable to rule this, the rule in question does not make this distinction.

[zergling.exe]

That is not what RAW says and I'm not aware of any errata or clarification on this matter. Was there such a thing?

While context might suggest that this "considered willing" bit refers only to the targets of "willing only" spells - and it is entirely reasonable to rule this, the rule in question does not make this distinction.

[Harmless] spells are the ones that don't require saves unless the creatures intentionally wants to make one. Otherwise you always you always make the saves/resists, even while unconscious. Being willing only affects "willing only" spells.

[KillianHawkeye]

That is not what RAW says and I'm not aware of any errata or clarification on this matter. Was there such a thing?

While context might suggest that this "considered willing" bit refers only to the targets of "willing only" spells - and it is entirely reasonable to rule this, the rule in question does not make this distinction.

The rule for intentionally failing a saving throw pretty clearly requires a conscious choice from the target. They can't do that if they're unconscious. Otherwise you'd have people failing saves to poison just because they're asleep, and none of the spells that specifically target sleeping characters would make any sense.

Ruling that unconscious characters automatically fail all saving throws creates a lot more problems than it solves, especially when there's a much more reasonable way to interpret things.

EDIT: But you know what? This conversation is getting off-topic, so I'm just going to leave it at that. The arguments have all been made before. I probably shouldn't have even brought it up. :smallsigh:

[Lazymancer]

Otherwise you'd have people failing saves to poison just because they're asleep, and none of the spells that specifically target sleeping characters would make any sense.
Because consciously failing poison saves makes so much more sense, no less than the utterly sensible requirement for the line of effect the spells in question have.


EDIT: But you know what? This conversation is getting off-topic, so I'm just going to leave it at that. The arguments have all been made before. I probably shouldn't have even brought it up. :smallsigh:
Well, yes. It is only tangentially related to the teleportation problem and the main problem was that I forgot to add "if your GM interprets rule this way". It has been some time since I was reminded about the other camp being somewhere out there.