Feeblemind, Feeble Morals

[quiet1mi]

So I was reading through the Beguilers spell list and noticed the level five spell "Feeblemind"

At first I was like what ever, it only last for a little while right?

Feeblemind is instantaneous so it cannot be dispelled, It is at a ranged so you can be out of a sword swingers range.

The main thing that blew me away was the fact that the only way to reverse being INT 1 and CHA 1 was the spell, Heal, Wish, Miracle... any badguy worth his salt will more than likely Feeblemind enemies so that they are not dead (but are effectively and magically lobotomized) and hide them with invisibility, nondection and other spells, and restrain the lobotomized enemy within a simple cell...

my question is, my Beguiler is a ex-guerilla from a recent war, he is LN. Does anyone think that my beguiler runs the risk of becoming LE if he continues to use this spell?

[Starbuck_II]

So I was reading through the Beguilers spell list and noticed the level five spell "Feeblemind"

At first I was like what ever, it only last for a little while right?

Feeblemind is instantaneous so it cannot be dispelled, It is at a ranged so you can be out of a sword swingers range.

The main thing that blew me away was the fact that the only way to reverse being INT 1 and CHA 1 was the spell, Heal, Wish, Miracle... any badguy worth his salt will more than likely Feeblemind enemies so that they are not dead (but are effectively and magically lobotomized) and hide them with invisibility, nondection and other spells, and restrain the lobotomized enemy within a simple cell...

my question is, my Beguiler is a ex-guerilla from a recent war, he is LN. Does anyone think that my beguiler runs the risk of becoming LE if he continues to use this spell?

Interestingly, even though it doesn't lower Wisdom: it still prevents spellcasting. So it affects all arcane/divine casters.

[Toliudar]

Well, since the spell is robbing someone of their freedom, and their mind, I'd say it's roughly equivalent to killing them. Any situation in which killing someone would be construed as an evil act, I'd also consider feebleminding them an evil act - unless the character then takes steps to have them un-feebleminded in the near future.

[herrhauptmann]

Don't forget, arcane casters are at a -4 penalty on their saving throw. I hate feeblemind, so bad.

A while back I was making my first wizard, level 12 or so, and reread feeblemind in the process.
Instantly, added to my list of items: Ring of Counterspelling with Feeblemind inside it.
One of his fears, was actually getting blasted with that spell. As a young wizard student, there was an old wizard with Alzheimers/dementia living on campus grounds, and the rumor among students was that he had been hit with Feeblemind too many times.

[taltamir]

it is not the spell, it is what you do with it...
Casting it on the evil guy mid combat to cripple him so that you can defeat him (by killing him)? not evil.
Casting it on random farmers to lobotomize them and then sell them into slavery? evil.

[Raewyn]

To answer your question, Feeblemind lacks the evil descriptor, so your alignment will not change simply from casting it. It's what you do with your enemy after that could change your alignment.

Also, keep in mind that anything you throw at the DM gives him license to throw it back at you, so don't abuse it (especially since you'll get a -4 penalty to the save).

[Mewtarthio]

Also, keep in mind that anything you throw at the DM gives him license to throw it back at you, so don't abuse it (especially since you'll get a -4 penalty to the save).

The spell's very existence gives the DM license to throw it at him.

[Ravens_cry]

The spell's very existence gives the DM license to throw it at him.

Technically, but the DM, within his licence, could rock-fall-everybody-die-oh-you-want-a-save-roll-dc-75-for-half-damage-at-666-d6 's everybody. Just because you can do anything, doesn't mean you should.

[mabriss lethe]

as a dm in an evil game, I've already taught them to fear the feeblemind. (no, I don't do it often, only once to date... but it was enough to really screw with them.) It was a crack squad of assassins, 3 assassin mages ofthe same level as the pcs, vs a four man party with something like 60hd of undead in tow. it shouldn't have been that challenging, but the cleric got feebleminded and the necromancer finally used his brand new magic boots (taken off the body of a group of decoy assassins) only to realize that he'd been wearing boots of dancing....

[Darcand]

it could almost be ruled that using feeblemind is a good act, if you are doing it to keep from having to kill an enemy, and then make sure they have some means of care after.

[Myrmex]

In D&D morality, using Feeblemind is more Good than bringing something to -10 HP.

If you use it on a non-evil creature, you have the chance to remedy your action. If you use it on an evil creature, you effectively neuter its threat and presents a chance at redeeming the creature.

[quiet1mi]

Even though it is considered "Non-lethal" and does not cause "Pain" is anyone else who plays a INT based character horrified by what it does?

[kamikasei]

Well, since the spell is robbing someone of their freedom, and their mind, I'd say it's roughly equivalent to killing them. Any situation in which killing someone would be construed as an evil act, I'd also consider feebleminding them an evil act - unless the character then takes steps to have them un-feebleminded in the near future.

This seems rather extreme. It's reversible at zero cost, after all (if you have heal or miracle, though granted, the earliest standard access to heal comes two levels after feeblemind).

It's an enchantment that removes them as a threat until undone. Consider sequester or imprisonment, which place their subjects in "a state of suspended animation". If you use any of these to permanently render someone incapable of experiencing their life in any meaningful way, it's a poor man's murder; but none are necessarily equivalent to killing them.

If you're in the habit of feebleminding people and then walking away, on the other hand, you're destroying their life.

[Shadowbane]

I'm absolutely horrified by it, but I don't make it shift your alignment when I DM.

[bosssmiley]

Watch out for feeblemind. Much like disjunction or magic jar it's one of the mutually assured destruction spells of D&D.

There's no mandated alignment change for using it, but with it being effectively a full frontal lobotomy-in-a-can you still have to watch the ethics of chucking feebleminds around. Your DM may decide that excessive and flagrant use puts you beyond the pale of Team Good.

That said, it's still great karmic justice on caster villains.

[kamikasei]

I think it boils down to: if you feeblemind someone and leave them that way as if it were morally superior to killing them, you're likely to get a surprise alignment change. If you feeblemind someone in order to make killing them easier, you're not in any extra trouble for feebleminding them over just killing them. If you feeblemind someone as a substitute for just leaving them bound and gagged and under continual guard, or knocking them unconscious again every time they start to wake up, you're either breaking even or coming out slightly ahead (less chance of inadvertent lasting brain damage) and the overall morality of any of those actions will be decided by what you do with them once they're in such a vulnerable position.

[Jayabalard]

it could almost be ruled that using feeblemind is a good act, if you are doing it to keep from having to kill an enemy, and then make sure they have some means of care after.

I would have to totally disagree; inflicting a fate worse than death is not a good act.

[Foryn Gilnith]

I would have to totally disagree; inflicting a fate worse than death is not a good act.

"Fate worse than death" is ambiguous. I would consider Feeblemind almost exactly like death, except without afterlife. Int 1/Cha 1 isn't a creature I would recognize as "me", so when the spell goes down I (from my identity's perception) "die". "Resurrection" is when somebody with pity on that humanoid beast gets a Heal for it.

[loopy]

Aaand thank you. I know what spell my evil Beguiler Lijah Syn will be using when he makes it to 4th level spells.

[taltamir]

"Fate worse than death" is ambiguous. I would consider Feeblemind almost exactly like death, except without afterlife. Int 1/Cha 1 isn't a creature I would recognize as "me", so when the spell goes down I (from my identity's perception) "die". "Resurrection" is when somebody with pity on that humanoid beast gets a Heal for it.

+1 on that one...
You are essentially dead, your body is alive, but so what? it is just a sack of meat

[Jayabalard]

+1 on that one...
You are essentially dead, your body is alive, but so what?

So what? You (as an individual) essentially cease to exist for the duration of the spell, (permanently if not reversed). That's far worse than moving off to the tavern of infinite one night stands (ie, death).

[taltamir]

So what? You (as an individual) essentially cease to exist for the duration of the spell, (permanently if not reversed). That's far worse than moving off to the tavern of infinite one night stands (ie, death).

that was kinda my point

[lsfreak]

So what? You (as an individual) essentially cease to exist for the duration of the spell, (permanently if not reversed). That's far worse than moving off to the tavern of infinite one night stands (ie, death).

I Feebleminded you in order to keep you from being damned to hell because of your devotion to a demon lord. You are currently safe and away while said demon lord is being hunted and killed. Afterwords you are unfeebleminded, and your soul has been saved from eternal damnation.

Also, be very very careful with the argument you're making in this post. It's not much of a leap (in fact, more of a small sidestep) to extend it to purely earthy punishments (i.e. compare how much 'better' being free is than being jailed).

[Indon]

So what? You (as an individual) essentially cease to exist for the duration of the spell, (permanently if not reversed). That's far worse than moving off to the tavern of infinite one night stands (ie, death).

I don't know about that. I think the ability might suppress an individual in many ways, but it doesn't eliminate them.

Let's use a feebleminded Druid as an example. That druid may not be talkative anymore, and it may not be able to cast spells, but it still has some of its' class features (such as the now highly appropriate Wild Shape) and it could potentially have most of its' personality intact - that Druid could be hostile towards people or things the Druid doesn't like, for instance, though that hostility might manifest as Wild Shape: Wolf and growling rather than some other way.

Even if you're an Int-based character, your character is still driven by almost everything they were driven by pre-feebleminding (curiousity and social gregariousness being the two big exceptions). It could be a good opportunity to expand a character, so long as it isn't permanent.

[taltamir]

what happens if you cast maximized awaken on someone who is feebleminded?

[Agrippa]

Watch out for feeblemind. Much like disjunction or magic jar it's one of the mutually assured destruction spells of D&D.

There's no mandated alignment change for using it, but with it being effectively a full frontal lobotomy-in-a-can you still have to watch the ethics of chucking feebleminds around. Your DM may decide that excessive and flagrant use puts you beyond the pale of Team Good.

Then what would you say about a character who freely employes dominate person and mass dominate person to turn his enemies into assassins and force surrendering troops to commit mass suicide and then conceals this behavior from his own forces, including his loyal second in command? How about if he could have just as easily captured them all using the same spell, take them prisoner and treat them humanely? Oh and to top it all off he inadvertantly mind-controlled his beloved half-sister (whom he lusted after ever since they were six years old) into massacring the people whose lives she lied, cheated, blackmailed, extorted and made backroom deals to improve for years.

That said, it's still great karmic justice on caster villains.

Of course it is. That's it's main purpose.

[taltamir]

its for people who think "killing him will make us just like him"... so instead of killing the BBEG they lobotomize him... and happily ignore the lynch mob of thousands of orphans, widowers, relatives, and others who are then gonna string him up for all the pain and suffering he caused...

They might as well have made a spell called karmic death...
"fall into the volcano when you try to stab the hero WHILE he is pulling you up to save your life, because your alignment is SE" (SE = stupid evil) aka... the "karmic death"

[Foryn Gilnith]

Then what would you say about a character who ...turn his enemies into assassins...mass suicide...mind-controlled his beloved half-sister into massacring the people

Assassins, mass suicide, and massacre. Sounds at least halfway to evil. Most likely all the way there, in the absence of severely extenuating circumstances.

[taltamir]

Assassins, mass suicide, and massacre. Sounds at least halfway to evil. Most likely all the way there, in the absence of severely extenuating circumstances.

halfway? it is not the spell it is the actions...
its like saying someone is using feeble minded + dominate to rape or create a prostitution ring from unwilling NPCs and then asking if the spell should be considered evil.

[KillianHawkeye]

what happens if you cast maximized awaken on someone who is feebleminded?

Nothing, unless the feebleminded creature was already an animal (or a tree) to begin with, which would be kinda pointless.