View Full Version : Why does everyone think spellcasters destroy martial classes?
Sholos
2008-09-03, 01:09 AM
What 5K isn't huge enough? If you raise it too much who would even use it?
Obviously not, if he can afford to blow that much on a simple duel.
Talic
2008-09-03, 01:59 AM
I am well aware what Darkstalker fails to do, however, unlike everyone else in the entire universe, I don't start from the assumption that I am within 30ft of someone who has never given me any reason to kill him, and I therefore must kill him as soon as I detect him.
The Darkstalker Rogue and the Superior Invisibility Wizard just happen to adventure in different places (or the same place) and never run into each other at all.
I dunno. While it may not be good form to kill the guy, you know that the following is true:
1) Something is close to you, right over there.
2) It's deliberately trying to be not noticed, and is doing a very good job of it.
Sounds like a good reason for detaining, at the very least.
Starbuck_II
2008-09-03, 06:58 AM
Obviously not, if he can afford to blow that much on a simple duel.
I thougtht this was a battle to the death!
The other class be smirked his honor by calling him overpowered.
So the Wizard killed the Psions butt to prove he wasn't overpowered: Wizards aren't known for good insight/wisdom and all.
ZekeArgo
2008-09-03, 07:12 AM
smirked his honor
Smirked? I didn't know you could arrogantly smile at someones honor. :smallcool:
It's besmirched.:smallbiggrin:
Akimbo
2008-09-03, 07:57 AM
I dunno. While it may not be good form to kill the guy, you know that the following is true:
1) Something is close to you, right over there.
2) It's deliberately trying to be not noticed, and is doing a very good job of it.
Sounds like a good reason for detaining, at the very least.
Only if you are within 100ft, which there is no reason to ever be, since neither of you knows about the other ones existence.
Sholos
2008-09-03, 01:34 PM
Well, you could accidentally be within 100 feet of each other. Though if you start randomly detaining anyone you see that's trying to remain hidden, I'd imagine you'd start becoming very unfavorable with the locals. There are reasons why someone might wish to remain hidden besides trying to hurt you.
Well, you could accidentally be within 100 feet of each other. Though if you start randomly detaining anyone you see that's trying to remain hidden, I'd imagine you'd start becoming very unfavorable with the locals. There are reasons why someone might wish to remain hidden besides trying to hurt you.
Yeah, but he doesn't care what the locals think, because he's Neutral Evil.
Oslecamo
2008-09-03, 02:09 PM
Rule 3456 of the good caster: KILL EVERYTHING THAT APROACHES YOU!
Wow, I would really like to see those characters in a real campaign. Of course the world will end up ganking in the caster, because the caster's paranoia will make him try to obliterate anything that he sees.
fractic
2008-09-03, 02:11 PM
Rule 3456 of the good caster: KILL EVERYTHING THAT APROACHES YOU!
Wow, I would really like to see those characters in a real campaign. Of course the world will end up ganking in the caster, because the caster's paranoia will make him try to obliterate anything that he sees.
At high levels the casters are assumed to have foresight running. This tells them when to expect danger. So they won't just kill everybody in sight. The mage could also be casting divinations to find out what threaths he might face this day.
Oslecamo
2008-09-03, 02:22 PM
At high levels the casters are assumed to have foresight running. This tells them when to expect danger. So they won't just kill everybody in sight. The mage could also be casting divinations to find out what threaths he might face this day.
At high levels, you can expect your enemies to run around with mindblanck all day long, wich blocks all divination tricks. So anythingt that moves can be an high level oponent protected by mindblank and disguised.
Griffin131
2008-09-03, 02:25 PM
At high levels, you can expect your enemies to run around with mindblanck all day long, wich blocks all divination tricks. So anythingt that moves can be an high level oponent protected by mindblank and disguised.
Mind Blank does not block Foresight.
hamishspence
2008-09-03, 02:34 PM
Foresight is very, very limited, its not a You Know the future power, its a "you react to attack at the last minute" power. Does not let you read minds.
Divination-wise, Metafaculty is one of the few non-epic abilities capable of getting through mind blank, and needs a caster level check (DC 6+ opponents caster level)
Griffin131
2008-09-03, 02:41 PM
Foresight is very, very limited, its not a You Know the future power, its a "you react to attack at the last minute" power. Does not let you read minds.
Divination-wise, Metafaculty is one of the few non-epic abilities capable of getting through mind blank, and needs a caster level check (DC 6+ opponents caster level)
Not sure what you're arguing here, but since Foresight never actually targets the Mind Blank'ed person, they don't interact.
hamishspence
2008-09-03, 02:48 PM
the statement "Foresight tells you when to expect danger" seemed to me to be overestimating value of foresight, which is why I mentioned this.
Yet at least one divination can do what Foresight cannot, which is why I mentioned that.
Oslecamo
2008-09-03, 03:20 PM
From Mind blanck:
"The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts"
The word "target" is never used. It simply says that if a spell tries to detect you, it fails.
In any case, Foresight only alerts the Spellcaster of the ambush the moment before it is sprung. He has no idea that he has been standing in the kill zone until it's time for it to go off. He isn't going to know that the guy is hiding nearby with bad intentions until just prior to the attack.
Besides, what happens if the Rogue UMD's Celerity right after the wizard does?
hamishspence
2008-09-03, 03:25 PM
and foresight isn't a detector, its a booster of your own defenses: you can have bonus to defense against a surprise attack from someone invisible, without detecting them.
Metafaculty is specifically called out as being able to overcome mind blank.
Akimbo
2008-09-03, 03:53 PM
In any case, Foresight only alerts the Spellcaster of the ambush the moment before it is sprung. He has no idea that he has been standing in the kill zone until it's time for it to go off. He isn't going to know that the guy is hiding nearby with bad intentions until just prior to the attack.
Besides, what happens if the Rogue UMD's Celerity right after the wizard does?
Is there any way to UMD as an Immediate action that interrupts someone else's turn?
Griffin131
2008-09-03, 03:57 PM
From Mind blanck:
"The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts"
The word "target" is never used. It simply says that if a spell tries to detect you, it fails.
It has nothing to do with Mind Blank. Foresight:
Once foresight is cast, you receive instantaneous warnings of impending danger or harm to the subject of the spell.
Am I in danger? If yes, Foresight warns me. Whether the person I'm in danger from is Mind Blank'ed or not is irrelevant - I am in danger, and should dodge left (right, back, forward, whatever). Foresight is not detecting or influencing your emotions or thoughts. Its detecting my personage being in danger.
Aquillion
2008-09-03, 07:39 PM
From Mind blanck:
"The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts"
The word "target" is never used. It simply says that if a spell tries to detect you, it fails.You're quoting that line out of context. It is a modifier and elaboration to the sentence that comes before it; together, they read:
The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects.In other words, the first sentence gives you a broad overview of what the spell does (keeps you from being detected, influenced, or mind-read); the second sentence gives you specific examples of when the protection in the first sentence is applied.
When it says 'This spell protects...', it is referring to the circumstances under which that aforementioned 'protection' (against devices and spells that detect, influence, or read) comes into effect.
That general description of how Mind Blank works is then followed by a specific list of what it does:
In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn’t detected. Scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at the subject do not work at all.
Specific trumps general; "Raise Dead" does not simply restore life to a deceased creature, free of strings, even though the first sentence says simply "You restore life to a deceased creature." Likewise, Mind Blank's protection is specifically limited to what is described in the last two sentences (nullification of direct targeting, and wiping you from area-effects); the first part just gives a broad overview and a more general idea of when (and against what effects) that protection works.
Jayabalard
2008-09-03, 08:03 PM
Specific trumps general; "Raise Dead" does not simply restore life to a deceased creature, free of strings, even though the first sentence says simply "You restore life to a deceased creature." Likewise, Mind Blank's protection is specifically limited to what is described in the last two sentences (nullification of direct targeting, and wiping you from area-effects); the first part just gives a broad overview and a more general idea of when (and against what effects) that protection works.The specific vs general doesn't really matter, since the last two sentences don't counter anything in the earlier ones. Those last two sentences are just specifics on how mind blank interacts with scrying attempts; they don't indicate that scrying is the only thing that it blocks; the general statement still holds.
I'd say the important part is "This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects." and that foresight qualifies as a divination spell or effect that gathers information so Mind blank prevents foresight from giving any information about you.
Griffin131
2008-09-03, 08:26 PM
I'd say the important part is "This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects." and that foresight qualifies as a divination spell or effect that gathers information so Mind blank prevents foresight from giving any information about you.
Except that Foresight doesn't gain information about anyone other than the one being threatened. All it does is warn the target - it doesn't say who is threatening you, or anything like that...
Yes, its semi-counter intuitive for it to work like that, but Foresight doesn't have to know where the threat is coming from, only that it exists and something to tell the caster on a possible way to avoid it.
Jayabalard
2008-09-03, 08:30 PM
Except that Foresight doesn't gain information about anyone other than the one being threatened. All it does is warn the target - it doesn't say who is threatening you, or anything like that...It gives the wizard information that someone is threatening them; specifically the person with mind blank. That still sounds like information from a divination spell to me.
Flickerdart
2008-09-03, 08:31 PM
Foresight does none of the following: detect, influence or read emotions or thoughts of a person. It and Mind Blank never intersect. What Foresight does is predict a moment into the future and if you're in danger, tells you. It doesn't give a damn whether the danger is coming from a Rogue with knives or a trap, which doesn't even have emotions or thoughts.
Jayabalard
2008-09-03, 08:35 PM
Foresight does none of the following: detect, influence or read emotions or thoughts of a person.It is, on the other hand, a divination spell that provides information about the future actions of someone else, which is where it intersects mind blank.
Kaihaku
2008-09-03, 08:45 PM
On a more contemplative note and less...I can beat you, really, somehow...
How would Foresight interact with an AMF? If the caster is about to be plunged into an AMF, can it still send warnings about that anti-magiced future? Would it count as divining into an AMF?
Flickerdart
2008-09-03, 08:50 PM
It is, on the other hand, a divination spell that provides information about the future actions of someone else, which is where it intersects mind blank.
But it doesn't affect the Mind Blanked guy. It's an effect always active only on the Foresight wizard that divines on the Wizard himself. Unless you Mind Blank the Wizard, it still works. At least that's how I'd rule it.
But it doesn't affect the Mind Blanked guy. It's an effect always active only on the Foresight wizard that divines on the Wizard himself. Unless you Mind Blank the Wizard, it still works. At least that's how I'd rule it.
Well, the pro-wizard guys do always say they have it running 24/7...
streakster
2008-09-03, 09:07 PM
On a more contemplative note and less...I can beat you, really, somehow...
How would Foresight interact with an AMF? If the caster is about to be plunged into an AMF, can it still send warnings about that anti-magiced future? Would it count as divining into an AMF?
I'd say it would warn you, yes. It warns of danger, and to a caster, an AMF is just that.
I'd say it would warn you, yes. It warns of danger, and to a caster, an AMF is just that.
That's pretty thin, there.
streakster
2008-09-03, 09:35 PM
That's pretty thin, there.
How so?
Is it a danger? I'd say yes.
What does Foresight do? Warn me of danger.
So should this work? As far as I can tell, yes.
What have I missed, or what do we disagree on?
How so?
Is it a danger? I'd say yes.
What does Foresight do? Warn me of danger.
So should this work? As far as I can tell, yes.
What have I missed, or what do we disagree on?
The antimagic field itself poses no danger to the spellcaster whatsoever. If somebody is waiting to spring an attack, then it is the person about to attack that is the danger. If the spellcaster is about to spring a trap, it is the trap that is a danger. A spellcaster can spend his entire life inside an antimagic field and be is no danger whatsoever.
streakster
2008-09-03, 09:55 PM
The antimagic field itself poses no danger to the spellcaster whatsoever. If somebody is waiting to spring an attack, then it is the person about to attack that is the danger. If the spellcaster is about to spring a trap, it is the trap that is a danger. A spellcaster can spend his entire life inside an antimagic field and be is no danger whatsoever.
Ah. We disagree on that, then. Though your position is quite reasonable, I would count the loss of the spellcaster's spells as a danger. After all, wouldn't Foresight warn you of a trap that didn't harm you, but did entangle you in a net, say?
Ah. We disagree on that, then. Though your position is quite reasonable, I would count the loss of the spellcaster's spells as a danger. After all, wouldn't Foresight warn you of a trap that didn't harm you, but did entangle you in a net, say?
Well it's really a fine line. What if you were on a boat? Would you be receiving constant warnings of impending danger because you could fall overboard at any time? You can make a case either way for it.
Basically, Foresight is one of those spells whose power is directly tied to how powerful the DM allows it to be.
streakster
2008-09-03, 10:13 PM
Well it's really a fine line. What if you were on a boat? Would you be receiving constant warnings of impending danger because you could fall overboard at any time? You can make a case either way for it.
Basically, Foresight is one of those spells whose power is directly tied to how powerful the DM allows it to be.
Very true. DM determines.
And that would be hilarious.
Foresight:Danger, Wizard Robinson! Danger!
Wiz: What?
Fore: You're on a boat!
Wiz: ...
Fore: AAAaaah! Seagulls!
Wiz: They...aren't dangerous.
Fore: What if they're hungry...for FLESH!?
Wiz: I hate this spell.
Akimbo
2008-09-03, 10:25 PM
The antimagic field itself poses no danger to the spellcaster whatsoever. If somebody is waiting to spring an attack, then it is the person about to attack that is the danger. If the spellcaster is about to spring a trap, it is the trap that is a danger. A spellcaster can spend his entire life inside an antimagic field and be is no danger whatsoever.
Except if the caster is 20ft off the ground then the AMF is a danger because it causes him to fall and take 1d6 damage.
So if he's in the air, then AMF is a danger.
Griffin131
2008-09-04, 03:22 AM
It is, on the other hand, a divination spell that provides information about the future actions of someone else, which is where it intersects mind blank.
No. Foresight never has to know who is creating the danger. You're thinking that Foresight uses cause-effect to generate warning messages. Its magic - it only has to know that there will be danger to warn you. Not that Bob the Mind Blank'ed rogue is going to try to give you some stabbity death through your kidneys.
Sholos
2008-09-04, 03:36 AM
Of course, if the only thing Foresight does is tell you that you're in some sort of danger, it's pretty easy to interpret that in ways so that it doesn't get abused. Even barring that, it still doesn't tell you what you're in danger from, just that you're in danger, yes?
Kaihaku
2008-09-04, 03:45 AM
It gives you simple directions on how to avoid the unidentified danger at hand.
Griffin131
2008-09-04, 06:45 AM
Of course, if the only thing Foresight does is tell you that you're in some sort of danger, it's pretty easy to interpret that in ways so that it doesn't get abused. Even barring that, it still doesn't tell you what you're in danger from, just that you're in danger, yes?
Exactly? I havnt been saying that or anything...
And being at sea wouldnt set it off, its an immediate danger thing.. so if he was swimming, maybe. Drowning, yes. On a boat relaxing on a lounge eating grapes while nymphs fan him with palm fronds... not so much.
Oslecamo
2008-09-04, 10:38 AM
It gives you simple directions on how to avoid the unidentified danger at hand.
Yeah, that's gonna help a lot:
Foresight: DANGER DANGER!
Wizard: How can I avoid it?
Foresight: Do something!
Wizard: Do some..AYEEEE!!! THE GOOGLES! THEY DO NOTHING!
Also, you could argue that Foresight would be going off all the time, since the D&D rules allow even a cat to be a threat to you. Not to mention random ecounter tables. The wizard will simply go insane if he tries to use the spell.
streakster
2008-09-04, 10:54 AM
Yeah, that's gonna help a lot:
Foresight: DANGER DANGER!
Wizard: How can I avoid it?
Foresight: Do something!
Wizard: Do some..AYEEEE!!! THE GOOGLES! THEY DO NOTHING!
Also, you could argue that Foresight would be going off all the time, since the D&D rules allow even a cat to be a threat to you. Not to mention random ecounter tables. The wizard will simply go insane if he tries to use the spell.
Simple directions, my friend. Not "Do something." "Run" or "Close your eyes" maybe.:smallsmile:
hamishspence
2008-09-04, 11:04 AM
and it doesn't grant you immunity to that danger, only a bonus to your saves against it. Mostly.
A "general warning" or an "instantaneous warning" still have limitations. You do not need to know precise nature of danger. Medusa about to gaze on you: you "avert yoour eyes" but you do not have to know that its a medusa under the cloak.
Starbuck_II
2008-09-04, 12:45 PM
and it doesn't grant you immunity to that danger, only a bonus to your saves against it. Mostly.
A "general warning" or an "instantaneous warning" still have limitations. You do not need to know precise nature of danger. Medusa about to gaze on you: you "avert yoour eyes" but you do not have to know that its a medusa under the cloak.
I don't think it would say Avert your eyes: More likely, "don't look!"
You still have no clue where not to look but you know it is something.
Oslecamo
2008-09-04, 02:14 PM
Simple directions, my friend. Not "Do something." "Run" or "Close your eyes" maybe.:smallsmile:
It's the DM who's giving out the advice, so the probability of it working are more or less the chances of a custom wish working.
The more you try to abuse it, the more the DM will screw you back.
Griffin131
2008-09-04, 07:41 PM
The more you try to abuse it, the more the DM will screw you back.
Adversarial playing! Thats a great way to play!
Or... you could just play by the rules, and realize that the major benefit of Foresight is to avoid surprise.
Adversarial playing! Thats a great way to play!
Yes, because there is nothing wrong with the player attempting to abuse wording which is open for interpritation.
Griffin131
2008-09-04, 08:21 PM
Yes, because there is nothing wrong with the player attempting to abuse wording which is open for interpritation.
There is. I'm not advocating it in any way. But going by the rules that Foresight makes it so you're not surprised is not abusing any wording.
Foresight doesn't scan the minds of people around you.
Foresight states you can't be surprised.
Where is the open for interpretation?
There is. I'm not advocating it in any way. But going by the rules that Foresight makes it so you're not surprised is not abusing any wording.
Foresight doesn't scan the minds of people around you.
Foresight states you can't be surprised.
Where is the open for interpretation?
I was referencing the earlier liberal interpritations of the spell.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.