Fizban
2021-05-02, 05:13 AM
So here's the text from Lesser Geas, with some emphasis:
A lesser geas places a magical command on a creature to carry out some service or to refrain from some action or course of activity, as desired by you. The creature must have 7 or fewer Hit Dice and be able to understand you. While a geas cannot compel a creature to kill itself or perform acts that would result in certain death, it can cause almost any other course of activity.
The geased creature must follow the given instructions until the geas is completed, no matter how long it takes.
If the instructions involve some open-ended task that the recipient cannot complete through his own actions the spell remains in effect for a maximum of one day per caster level. . .
If the subject is prevented from obeying the lesser geas for 24 hours, it takes a -2 penalty to each of its ability scores. Each day, another -2 penalty accumulates, up to a total of -8. No ability score can be reduced to less than 1 by this effect. The ability score penalties are removed 24 hours after the subject resumes obeying the lesser geas.
This sure makes it sound like Lesser Geas is one heck of a whammy, a compulsion that must be followed for 1 day/level whether the target likes it or not, unless they can subvert the wording, and even if someone prevents them from carrying out your orders they get hit with a wasting penalty that leaves them weak as a kitten, though not dead. It makes sense that a single spell that can compel someone for a full week, at only 4th level, would have a limit of 7 HD.*
*(Never mind that Charm Monster does so for the same duration, it seems clear there was an effective split between writers that considered Charms of only middling use, and those that think they're basically better than Dominate)
However, if we go to the text of 6th level Geas/Quest:
This spell functions similarly to lesser geas, except that it affects a creature of any HD and allows no saving throw.
Instead of taking penalties to ability scores (as with lesser geas), the subject takes 3d6 points of damage each day it does not attempt to follow the geas/quest. Additionally, each day it must make a Fortitude saving throw or become sickened. These effects end 24 hours after the creature attempts to resume the geas/quest.
And here we have the problem: Geas/Quest says "after the creature attempts to resume." Since it does not repeat the line from the lesser version about being prevented from following orders, and instead uses this new wording of "attempt," Geas/Quest seems to make it pretty clear that the target can simply choose not to follow orders, when Lesser Geas had made it clear that they must follow orders.
Because if you're compelled to do something, and someone prevents you from doing it, you were and are still attempting to do it, you're just being prevented. Being prevented causes the penalty clause to kick in. But the later version of the spell thinks that you can be prevented from even attempting, which is impossible: if you must follow orders because compulsion, you must attempt to resist and overcome anything that get in your way, because compulsion. If you are compelled, you never stop attempting to resume following orders, and the penalty clause can never happen (unlike the Lesser version, where the penalty clearly happens if you are prevented).
So, which is it? Does Geas/Quest reveal that Lesser Geas is actually completely useless? Does inducting the text of Lesser Geas actually mean that Geas/Quest is a no-save (10 minute cast) permanent compulsion that has a complicated means of slowly killing people if they're imprisoned?
Or is this split actually the intent? That Geas/"Quest" is just stick that bops people 1/day if they think they can get away with ignoring you, and thus it has no-save and only matters for voluntary quests or low-level NPCs (and it's a Compulsion because, uh, something), while Lesser Geas is actually a compulsion and so it allows a save and the HD limit is just some artifact of thinking "Greater Suggestion" or "Single-order Dominate" needed some extra limit?
There is no FAQ entry. I'm pretty sure both interpretations have been used in various adventures and mentions of the spells. Is anyone aware of an article or other source discussing the spells that might directly address this rather massive problem?
(I am somewhat aware of the mythological source/the word being able to refer even to/originally vows made willingly, and that the character (Cu Cuchulain?) was defeated by being tricked/maneuvered into violating their own vow- this would suggest the intent should be that the target can ignore the order. But I just can't seriously read the Lesser Geas text that way on its own, and other content really does seem to think these are Compulsions, not wrist-slapping).
A lesser geas places a magical command on a creature to carry out some service or to refrain from some action or course of activity, as desired by you. The creature must have 7 or fewer Hit Dice and be able to understand you. While a geas cannot compel a creature to kill itself or perform acts that would result in certain death, it can cause almost any other course of activity.
The geased creature must follow the given instructions until the geas is completed, no matter how long it takes.
If the instructions involve some open-ended task that the recipient cannot complete through his own actions the spell remains in effect for a maximum of one day per caster level. . .
If the subject is prevented from obeying the lesser geas for 24 hours, it takes a -2 penalty to each of its ability scores. Each day, another -2 penalty accumulates, up to a total of -8. No ability score can be reduced to less than 1 by this effect. The ability score penalties are removed 24 hours after the subject resumes obeying the lesser geas.
This sure makes it sound like Lesser Geas is one heck of a whammy, a compulsion that must be followed for 1 day/level whether the target likes it or not, unless they can subvert the wording, and even if someone prevents them from carrying out your orders they get hit with a wasting penalty that leaves them weak as a kitten, though not dead. It makes sense that a single spell that can compel someone for a full week, at only 4th level, would have a limit of 7 HD.*
*(Never mind that Charm Monster does so for the same duration, it seems clear there was an effective split between writers that considered Charms of only middling use, and those that think they're basically better than Dominate)
However, if we go to the text of 6th level Geas/Quest:
This spell functions similarly to lesser geas, except that it affects a creature of any HD and allows no saving throw.
Instead of taking penalties to ability scores (as with lesser geas), the subject takes 3d6 points of damage each day it does not attempt to follow the geas/quest. Additionally, each day it must make a Fortitude saving throw or become sickened. These effects end 24 hours after the creature attempts to resume the geas/quest.
And here we have the problem: Geas/Quest says "after the creature attempts to resume." Since it does not repeat the line from the lesser version about being prevented from following orders, and instead uses this new wording of "attempt," Geas/Quest seems to make it pretty clear that the target can simply choose not to follow orders, when Lesser Geas had made it clear that they must follow orders.
Because if you're compelled to do something, and someone prevents you from doing it, you were and are still attempting to do it, you're just being prevented. Being prevented causes the penalty clause to kick in. But the later version of the spell thinks that you can be prevented from even attempting, which is impossible: if you must follow orders because compulsion, you must attempt to resist and overcome anything that get in your way, because compulsion. If you are compelled, you never stop attempting to resume following orders, and the penalty clause can never happen (unlike the Lesser version, where the penalty clearly happens if you are prevented).
So, which is it? Does Geas/Quest reveal that Lesser Geas is actually completely useless? Does inducting the text of Lesser Geas actually mean that Geas/Quest is a no-save (10 minute cast) permanent compulsion that has a complicated means of slowly killing people if they're imprisoned?
Or is this split actually the intent? That Geas/"Quest" is just stick that bops people 1/day if they think they can get away with ignoring you, and thus it has no-save and only matters for voluntary quests or low-level NPCs (and it's a Compulsion because, uh, something), while Lesser Geas is actually a compulsion and so it allows a save and the HD limit is just some artifact of thinking "Greater Suggestion" or "Single-order Dominate" needed some extra limit?
There is no FAQ entry. I'm pretty sure both interpretations have been used in various adventures and mentions of the spells. Is anyone aware of an article or other source discussing the spells that might directly address this rather massive problem?
(I am somewhat aware of the mythological source/the word being able to refer even to/originally vows made willingly, and that the character (Cu Cuchulain?) was defeated by being tricked/maneuvered into violating their own vow- this would suggest the intent should be that the target can ignore the order. But I just can't seriously read the Lesser Geas text that way on its own, and other content really does seem to think these are Compulsions, not wrist-slapping).