Sleep VS Color spray

[CNFish]

Hey in a game that I am DM of, one of my players the wizard used the spell color spray, because of AoE a person who was earlier in the battle effected by a sleep spell was caught in the color spray. does the NPC who is asleep need to make a save against color spray? or does it even matter at all?

[Nifft]

It could be argued that a sleeping target is blind, and therefore immune to visual effects like color spray.

But the duration for color spray is measured in rounds, and the duration for sleep is measured in minutes, so presumably any effect of color spray would wear off before the target woke up.

Or the target would get coup-de-grace'd before either effect expired, if it's a goblin or other designated XP source.

[Luckmann]

I know of no rules concerning it, but I would argue that someone that is sleeping is also effectively blind.

Even if they're the kind of being that sleeps with their eyes open, it doesn't really "register", so I'd just call it blind.

[Goaty14]

Pretty sure there's a difference between 'blind' and 'eyes closed' (go closed your eyes in a bright room, then do the same in a dark room). I'd count the target as averting their eyes (see gaze attacks) and give them a bonus to the save.

[CNFish]

Pretty sure there's a difference between 'blind' and 'eyes closed' (go closed your eyes in a bright room, then do the same in a dark room). I'd count the target as averting their eyes (see gaze attacks) and give them a bonus to the save.

this is true but your still conscious. im thinking its more like a comatose sleep, since its magical and the only thing that can wake them up is wounding or slapping them then light wont affect them considering color spray does no damage, it doesn't negate or add (stack) to the effects of sleep


im just going to rule on the side since its a magical sleep, they are unaffected by color spray

[RoboEmperor]

People facing completely in the other direction of color spray still gets affected.

Color Spray is a pattern effect.


Pattern

Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. All patterns are mind-affecting spells.

Sleeping characters who are caught in it are still caught in it. Blindness does not save you from illusion spells.

[ryu]

Technically D&D, or at least 3.5, doesn't have facing. You're assumed to be facing all directions in a kind of quantum entanglement.

[Kelb_Panthera]

People facing completely in the other direction of color spray still gets affected.

Color Spray is a pattern effect.



Sleeping characters who are caught in it are still caught in it. Blindness does not save you from illusion spells.

While this is true in the general sense, color spray explicitly says that sightless creatures are unaffected. Eyes closed in sleep is effectively sightless.

[Fouredged Sword]

I think there is a rule somewhere about closing your eyes completly rendering you explicitly blind...

Maybe in the gaze attack section...

Let me check.

Nope. This is the language there.



An opponent can shut his eyes, turn his back on the creature, or wear a blindfold. In these cases, the opponent does not need to make a saving throw. The creature with the gaze attack gains total concealment relative to the opponent.


Not expressly blind. Oddly shutting your eyes only renders you unable to see creatures who have gaze attacks.

[Nifft]

People facing completely in the other direction of color spray still gets affected.

Color Spray is a pattern effect.



Sleeping characters who are caught in it are still caught in it. Blindness does not save you from illusion spells.

Sightless creatures are not affected by color spray.

That's the relevant fact of the matter.

[RoboEmperor]

While this is true in the general sense, color spray explicitly says that sightless creatures are unaffected. Eyes closed in sleep is effectively sightless.

DM: The wizard casts Color Spray
Player: My guy shuts his eyes
DM: Did he ready an action?
Player: No, it's a reflex
DM: Color Spray has no reflex save
Player: Yeah but my guy closes his eyes against the spell as a reflex since he knows it's color spray
DM: No you can't do that because there are no rules that say you can
Player: You know what? My guy passed his spellcraft check so he immediately closed his eyes as soon as he identified it so he's immune to it.
DM: Shutting your eyes doesn't stop color spray
Player: Why not? Sightless creatures are not affected.
DM: You're not sightless. You just closed your eyes.
Player: Ok, then my guy used his shield to block his eyes from the spellcaster
DM: You're still not sightless. You just used a shield to block your eyes.
Player: Making him effectively blind so he's definitely sightless
DM: No, sightless and can't see are two different things.

blah blah blah

Solution? Unless the character is blind, color spray affects the creature. Sleep =/= blind.

Just so we don't misunderstand each other, I don't use color spray. I find SoDs a terribly unreliable way to play the game, especially with SoDs that require you to close the distance.

[Kelb_Panthera]

DM: The wizard casts Color Spray
Player: My guy shuts his eyes
DM: Did he ready an action?
Player: No, it's a reflex
DM: Color Spray has no reflex save
Player: Yeah but my guy closes his...
DM: I said "no." Gimme the will save or you auto-fail.

That's how that goes. I'd give it to him on the readied action but he didn't take one so the rules function normally. The shield can work but he has to declare it before hand and the wizard gets total concealment from him.

Nothing will ever work if you don't want it to.

[Malimar]

Granting the assumption that a sleeping creature can be affected by color spray, I'm thinking of a different question: does being Stunned wake a sleeping creature?

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

"Sightless" is a creature property, not a condition. It refers to the blind, as well as creatures who do not have eyes, such as a Destrachan (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/destrachan.htm) (note the reference to "sighted" creatures in the Blindsight description). If they meant the blinded condition, they would have referenced that condition. For instance, a sighted person who just failed their save v. Glitterdust would still be affected by Color Spray. Therefore, being affected by Sleep causes most of Color Spray to be redundant, but it does not negate Color Spray.

Regarding the second question, the only things that awaken a character affected by Sleep are "slapping," "wounding," or using a specific standard action that is "an application of the aid another action." Using Color Spray to stun a creature does not apply.

[RoboEmperor]

DM: The wizard casts Color Spray
Player: My guy shuts his eyes
DM: Did he ready an action?
Player: No, it's a reflex
DM: Color Spray has no reflex save
Player: Yeah but my guy closes his...
DM: I said "no." Gimme the will save or you auto-fail.

That's how that goes. I'd give it to him on the readied action but he didn't take one so the rules function normally. The shield can work but he has to declare it before hand and the wizard gets total concealment from him.

Nothing will ever work if you don't want it to.

How would you respond to his spellcraft argument? Lets say he said that instead of the reflex thing. Spellcraft -> Identify color spray-> immediate eye closing.

No, I agree with GoodbyeSoberDay. Sightless is a creature property.

[Kelb_Panthera]

How would you respond to his spellcraft argument? Lets say he said that instead of the reflex thing. Spellcraft -> Identify color spray-> immediate eye closing.

No, I agree with GoodbyeSoberDay. Sightless is a creature property.

Same way I responded to the reflex thing, "That's not how it works. Gimme the will save and stop being a ****." Taking reasonable precautions is one thing. Trying to game me on a ruling is just petty munchkinism. You don't want to worry about visual attacks, get a blindfold of true darkness at the earliest opportunity or do -something- proactive. Reactive defenses are in the spell's write-up.

[RoboEmperor]

so it's either...
1. be a rule nazi and say sleeping or closing eyes is not sightless
2. be a rule nazi and say closing your eyes after a spellcraft check is impossible because rules don't say so
3. don't be a rule nazi and render color spray utterly worthless against high spellcraft characters.
4. homebrew and add in a reflex save combined with the spellcraft check.

Doing 3. as you said does sound munchkiny, and it does betray RAI for sure. 1&2 makes you look like a rule nazi and that's never good.

I'd go 1. honestly. Just because you close your eyes doesn't mean the magical lights won't penetrate your eyelids, so unless the sleeping character has a blindfold on I'd say color spray fully affects them.

[ericgrau]

While this is true in the general sense, color spray explicitly says that sightless creatures are unaffected. Eyes closed in sleep is effectively sightless.

Also eyes opened while asleep is typically sightless too. I believe the sleeping person isn't affected regardless. Or even if you'd argue that one might sleep with eyes open, I'd keep it simple and assume eyes shut.

Also keep it simple and assume "sightless" means "without sight". Can't see = not affected.

[Nifft]

Same way I responded to the reflex thing, "That's not how it works. Gimme the will save and stop being a ****." Taking reasonable precautions is one thing. Trying to game me on a ruling is just petty munchkinism. You don't want to worry about visual attacks, get a blindfold of true darkness at the earliest opportunity or do -something- proactive. Reactive defenses are in the spell's write-up. Yeah, there's a DM for a reason.

In my game, actually blinding yourself would render you "sightless", so if you really wanted to take active measures to avoid the risk of color spray, you could do that in my game -- but it would hurt, and would normally be rather detrimental.

Wearing a blindfold or closing your eyes would be insufficient. You'd need to sever your brain from contact with all visual stimulus.


so it's either...
1. be a rule nazi and
Wow, I didn't expect someone to commit an auto-Godwin and lose the thread on page 1.


Also eyes opened while asleep is typically sightless too. I believe the sleeping person isn't affected regardless. Or even if you'd argue that one might sleep with eyes open, I'd keep it simple and assume eyes shut.

Also keep it simple and assume "sightless" means "without sight". Can't see = not affected. Heh, good point on the possibility of sleeping with your eyes open, and good judgment on that not mattering.

[Crake]

I believe I read somewhere that deciding if you want to have your eyes close or not was a decision you made at the beginning of the round, and lasted until the start of your next turn, so you can't say "I close my eyes for the color spray" unless you also want to be blind against all the attacks that happen that round, because things happening in order is just simulationism, the things are actually happening simultaneously.

Also, if it were an action you could just toggle on and off (a free action if you would), it wouldn't be something you could do when it's not your turn, because... you can't take actions when it's not your turn, unless you readied an action as stated before.

[Kelb_Panthera]

so it's either...
1. be a rule nazi and say sleeping or closing eyes is not sightless
2. be a rule nazi and say closing your eyes after a spellcraft check is impossible because rules don't say so
3. don't be a rule nazi and render color spray utterly worthless against high spellcraft characters.
4. homebrew and add in a reflex save combined with the spellcraft check.

Doing 3. as you said does sound munchkiny, and it does betray RAI for sure. 1&2 makes you look like a rule nazi and that's never good.

I'd go 1. honestly. Just because you close your eyes doesn't mean the magical lights won't penetrate your eyelids, so unless the sleeping character has a blindfold on I'd say color spray fully affects them.

Part of the job of the DM is to keep things on track. Letting an attempt at munchkinry bog things down is failing in that duty, to say nothing of the disrespect the player is showing here. You want me to take on the butt-ton of extra work DMing entails, you're going to have to accept my rulings or you're going to have to find a new DM.

More importantly, if you think merely being firm with a player that's being disruptive makes the GM a nazi, then you're not someone I want to play with in the first place. If the GM makes a bad ruling, the middle of an encounter is not the time to deal with it. Talk after the session about it and be ready to accept that he might stand by it. If he stands by enough decisions you dislike, he's not the GM for you.

[RoboEmperor]

Note that I called myself a rule nazi by saying if I was a DM I'd rule 1., a rule nazi option. So... I meant nothing by it. Seems the word is a lot more severe than I thought it was. I was just pointing out no matter how you rule on this color spray scenario, it's not gonna be perfect.

[Fouredged Sword]

The solution is simple. Do not twll your player "You cannot do X." You just need to tell your player what the effect is.

"You close your eyes and cover behind your shield. The colors swirl behind your eyelids. Shapes and patterns of imposible combinations flow around your shield and shine through the thin barrier of your eyelids. Roll a willsave."

[denthor]

DM: The wizard casts Color Spray
Player: My guy shuts his eyes
DM: Did he ready an action?
Player: No, it's a reflex
DM: Color Spray has no reflex save
Player: Yeah but my guy closes his eyes against the spell as a reflex since he knows it's color spray
DM: No you can't do that because there are no rules that say you can
Player: You know what? My guy passed his spellcraft check so he immediately closed his eyes as soon as he identified it so he's immune to it.
DM: Shutting your eyes doesn't stop color spray
Player: Why not? Sightless creatures are not affected.
DM: You're not sightless. You just closed your eyes.
Player: Ok, then my guy used his shield to block his eyes from the spellcaster
DM: You're still not sightless. You just used a shield to block your eyes.
Player: Making him effectively blind so he's definitely sightless
DM: No, sightless and can't see are two different things.

blah blah blah

Solution? Unless the character is blind, color spray affects the creature. Sleep =/= blind.

Just so we don't misunderstand each other, I don't use color spray. I find SoDs a terribly unreliable way to play the game, especially with SoDs that require you to close the distance.


In this situation it works you are blind for one round. If you attack -4 on your attack roll I am removing all enemies from the board pick the 5 foot square you want to attack . Then 50/50 roll if you hit. No matter what you need to spend 1 round doing nothing but spot check to find any opponent not in you immediate sight range. On my attack round you are considered flat footed no sight no shield no dexterity.

Or just make the roll.

Rules exist for a reason.

If wizard says I make spell craft. Great when did you roll my job is to verify. Roll now that I am watching

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Also keep it simple and assume "sightless" means "without sight". Can't see = not affected.I would argue that both solutions are quite simple, and one is consistent with the rest of the text, which leads to more simplicity down the road. There are numerous creatures (e.g. Destrachan, Grimlock) who lack eyes but have blindsight. Their blindsight entries all allow them to sense creatures "as a sighted creature could," and at least in MM1 (didn't check elsewhere) the creatures without eyes are explicitly immune to attacks that rely on sight. The Blinded condition does not confer this benefit. It is clear, simple, and consistent within the text to rule that sightless is a creature property.

Also, if it were an action you could just toggle on and off (a free action if you would), it wouldn't be something you could do when it's not your turn, because... you can't take actions when it's not your turn, unless you readied an action as stated before.If someone is willing to bend the rules enough to try and block Color Spray by closing their eyes off turn, they're going to argue that closing and opening your eyes is a non-action. But since the rules don't go into detail in that regard, the DM is in fact free to rule that it's a free action instead.

[Nifft]

If someone is willing to bend the rules enough to try and block Color Spray by closing their eyes off turn, they're going to argue that closing and opening your eyes is a non-action. But since the rules don't go into detail in that regard, the DM is in fact free to rule that it's a free action instead.

The DM could even say:


"Sure, closing your eyes is a great defense. In fact that's exactly what the Will save represents: having the Wisdom to close your eyes at exactly the right time to avoid seeing the magically pretty colors. So quit stalling and roll your Will save, you useless cheese-weasel."

... and that would neatly solve everything, wouldn't it?

[Pleh]

Hang on guys. Fair enough that Color Spray affects the dude.

But does it make any difference if the PC is already asleep? Color spray at worst can stun/blind/knock unconscious. If you're already asleep, you are helpless and your eyes are closed. There's not really any way color spray can make your condition any worse UNLESS you would otherwise be soon getting opportunities to wake up.

In that sense, it doesn't matter if they make a save. Again, it matters if he would wake up in a couple rounds whether you wake up blind and/or stunned.

[Nifft]

(...) the duration for color spray is measured in rounds, and the duration for sleep is measured in minutes, so presumably any effect of color spray would wear off before the target woke up.

Or the target would get coup-de-grace'd before either effect expired, if it's a goblin or other designated XP source.


But does it make any difference if the PC is already asleep? Color spray at worst can stun/blind/knock unconscious. If you're already asleep, you are helpless and your eyes are closed. There's not really any way color spray can make your condition any worse UNLESS you would otherwise be soon getting opportunities to wake up.

In that sense, it doesn't matter if they make a save. Again, it matters if he would wake up in a couple rounds whether you wake up blind and/or stunned.

Indeed, that's quite accurate.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Hang on guys. Fair enough that Color Spray affects the dude.

But does it make any difference if the PC is already asleep? Color spray at worst can stun/blind/knock unconscious. If you're already asleep, you are helpless and your eyes are closed. There's not really any way color spray can make your condition any worse UNLESS you would otherwise be soon getting opportunities to wake up.

In that sense, it doesn't matter if they make a save. Again, it matters if he would wake up in a couple rounds whether you wake up blind and/or stunned.Note that "unconscious" is much worse than "asleep." You can get woken up from sleeping in many ways, including as a group with a swift action 1st level spell called Rouse, or by getting stabbed without dying. If a foe with 2 or fewer HD is knocked unconscious by Color Spray, he's out for 2d4 rounds, period.

I wouldn't go out of my way to cast much of anything on sleeping targets when there are conscious enemies, but if the cone happens to catch a sleeping foe, all the better.

[Pleh]

Okay. Good point. Sleep spell says creatures affected can be woken with a standard action or by being wounded, while unconscious by color spray will keep them out unless a cleric has a spell that removes the unconscious condition.

That's actually good to know