Dysfunctional Rules IV- It's like a sandwich made of RAW failure!

[The Viscount]

Praying for spells at dusk seems mainly a flavor thing. The fact that it results in a necessary adjustment of game play to avoid hitting against the 8 hour spells rule seems dysfunctional.

[TuggyNE]

Telepathic bond is not mind-affecting, so you can slap it on a treant, a ghoul, or an inevitable with no difficulty whatsoever.

[Story]

It doesn't seem that dysfunctional. You could argue that it's more like giving someone a magic cellphone then trying to actually affect their mind.

After all, Sending isn't Mind Effecting either.

[mattie_p]

So, I was reading through Tome of Magic looking at random stuff when I found this -

Disciple of the Word (p 216)

Monk Abilities: A disciple of the word adds her class level to her monk level to determine her ... flurry of blows penalty...

...

A disciple of the word does not count her class levels for the purpose of determining when she gains any other monk class features, such as reduced penalties for flurry of blows attack rolls ...

So which is it? Do we add them or not?

[TuggyNE]

It doesn't seem that dysfunctional. You could argue that it's more like giving someone a magic cellphone then trying to actually affect their mind.

After all, Sending isn't Mind Effecting either.

Sending, though, doesn't (from what I'm reading) indicate anything about a mental message or whatever. It could just as easily be the magic cellphone effect, perhaps evoking your words to come out near the target or what have you.

But telepathic bond, for all that it's Divination, is obviously meddling directly with its subjects' minds. So that's just baffling to me.

[mattie_p]

Sending, though, doesn't (from what I'm reading) indicate anything about a mental message or whatever. It could just as easily be the magic cellphone effect, perhaps evoking your words to come out near the target or what have you.

But telepathic bond, for all that it's Divination, is obviously meddling directly with its subjects' minds. So that's just baffling to me.

So are you arguing that it is a RAI dysfunction? By the RAW, even creatures with immunity to certain conditions can be affected if willing (by dropping their immunity), and telepathic bond only affects willing creatures.

I don't think this is the thread for RAI dysfunctions, though.

[Fax Celestis]

I'm with the RAW dysfunction here, since the basically-equivalent psionic version, mindlink, is Telepathy [Mind-Affecting].

[mattie_p]

I'm with the RAW dysfunction here, since the basically-equivalent psionic version, mindlink, is Telepathy [Mind-Affecting].

Again, willing target. Willing targets can drop immunity to almost anything they wish (although, as a standard action - readied, in this case?). Psionics and Magic, despite transparency, are different, and function in different ways (magic mantle excepted).

[Fax Celestis]

Again, willing target. Willing targets can drop immunity to almost anything they wish (although, as a standard action - readied, in this case?). Psionics and Magic, despite transparency, are different, and function in different ways (magic mantle excepted).

Read the text of the spell. They are virtually identical, barring target quantities (and mindlink has an augment that lets you manifest it on an unwilling creature, so...).

[Big Fau]

So, I was reading through Tome of Magic looking at random stuff when I found this -

Disciple of the Word (p 216)

Monk Abilities: A disciple of the word adds her class level to her monk level to determine her ... flurry of blows penalty...

...

A disciple of the word does not count her class levels for the purpose of determining when she gains any other monk class features, such as reduced penalties for flurry of blows attack rolls ...

So which is it? Do we add them or not?

From a certain point of view, the Disciple of the Word PrC actually increases the penalty on FoB.

Who knew Truenaming had such bad editing?

[Chronos]

Quoth Fax:

Read the text of the spell. They are virtually identical, barring target quantities (and mindlink has an augment that lets you manifest it on an unwilling creature, so...).

Well, that accounts for that, then. Since Telepathic Bond only works on willing targets anyway, it doesn't matter whether it's [mind effecting] or not, since immune creatures would just lower their immunity. But Mindlink can be forced on unwilling targets, so it matters, and so they added the tag.

[georgie_leech]

Can you actually lower immunity from mind affecting from mindlessness? Because that sounds kind of dysfunctional in itself; spontaneous development of intelligence in less than six seconds.

[Andezzar]

I'm not aware that you can lower immunities. SR has an explicit exception.

[NeoPhoenix0]

This could be a stupid question, but where does it say you can lower immunity. I know that you can lower spell resistance and that some cases of immunity explicitly give exceptions or allow you to willingly take effects. But I can't find a general rule for immunities that don't explicitly say anything.

Edit: ninja'd by several minutes. wait, I remeber a discussion about the definition of getting monk'd, this might fall into that.

[nedz]

No Monk'd is like Ninja'd only you miss by hours, if not days. The worst I've seen was 2 1/2 years, thread necromancy was involved obviously.

[Chronos]

Well, if you're mindless, you can't do much of anything, beyond what you're instinctively programmed to do, and Telepathic Bond would pick up a blank, anyway.

[TuggyNE]

Well, that accounts for that, then. Since Telepathic Bond only works on willing targets anyway, it doesn't matter whether it's [mind effecting] or not, since immune creatures would just lower their immunity. But Mindlink can be forced on unwilling targets, so it matters, and so they added the tag.

It does matter, since lowering immunity (or, I think, raising it again) is a standard action, so that's an extra delay.

But eh.

[mattie_p]

Can you actually lower immunity from mind affecting from mindlessness? Because that sounds kind of dysfunctional in itself; spontaneous development of intelligence in less than six seconds.

I'm not aware that you can lower immunities. SR has an explicit exception.

This could be a stupid question, but where does it say you can lower immunity. I know that you can lower spell resistance and that some cases of immunity explicitly give exceptions or allow you to willingly take effects. But I can't find a general rule for immunities that don't explicitly say anything.

Edit: ninja'd by several minutes. wait, I remeber a discussion about the definition of getting monk'd, this might fall into that.

PHB p 177. Even creatures with a special immunity to certain magic can suppress that ability. It is under voluntarily failing saving throws, but describes an elf accepting a sleep spell.

[NeoPhoenix0]

PHB p 177. Even creatures with a special immunity to certain magic can suppress that ability. It is under voluntarily failing saving throws, but describes an elf accepting a sleep spell.

That is very informative, thank you.

It does matter, since lowering immunity (or, I think, raising it again) is a standard action, so that's an extra delay.

But eh.

You are thinking of lowering spell resistance, which is a standard action to lower and remains lowered until the start of your turn. You need to lower it every turn if you want to keep it down.

Based on PH pg 177, creatures with "special resistance" can just chose to not use it. Unless you can find a more specific rule for immunity.

[TuggyNE]

You are thinking of lowering spell resistance, which is a standard action to lower and remains lowered until the start of your turn. You need to lower it every turn if you want to keep it down.

Based on PH pg 177, creatures with "special resistance" can just chose to not use it. Unless you can find a more specific rule for immunity.

I was, yes, mostly because the alternative was too baffling to initially think of.

[nedz]

I'm not sure this is a full on dysfunction, but it does fly in the face of reason.

Intimidating Strike is a standard action so you can't use it on a charge.

Aren't charges meant to be intimidating ?

[GlorinSteampike]

Can you actually lower immunity from mind affecting from mindlessness? Because that sounds kind of dysfunctional in itself; spontaneous development of intelligence in less than six seconds.

I agree. It now seems the disfunction is my Undead minions can lower their special immunities to be granted Morale bonuses.

[TuggyNE]

I agree. It now seems the disfunction is my Undead minions can lower their special immunities to be granted Morale bonuses.

Isn't there actually a bardic ACF or something for that apparent purpose? Or is that just so you can fascinate and suggestion your enemies?

[NeoPhoenix0]

Isn't there actually a bardic ACF or something for that apparent purpose? Or is that just so you can fascinate and suggestion your enemies?

There is a feat called Requiem in libris mortis.

[3WhiteFox3]

Does that mean that mindless vermin and oozes can also lower their immunity to mind-affecting spells? If so, that seems really wrong.

[Ksheep]

Does that mean that mindless vermin and oozes can also lower their immunity to mind-affecting spells? If so, that seems really wrong.

Wouldn't they need to willingly lower that immunity? Consciously make an effort to suppress it? Isn't that then a moot point, seeing as they are mindless and cannot think "Oh, hey, it might be a good idea to lower my immunity to things that alter my mind"?

[Andezzar]

for vermin and oozes this sounds indeed wrong, but I can see golems and other mindless constructs to have received such instructions.

[georgie_leech]

*coughs*

Can you actually lower immunity from mind affecting from mindlessness? Because that sounds kind of dysfunctional in itself; spontaneous development of intelligence in less than six seconds.

To rephrase, as rule that implies that it's possible to spontaneously generate a mind to affect by [mind affecting] spells with a Standard Action seems pretty dysfunctional.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw

A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell’s result. Even a character with a special resistance to magic can suppress this quality.

This is the rules text on trial here. To me the words voluntary and willingly imply that a creature must have intelligence to use them. It doesn't seem to imply anything about mindless creatures spontaneously having the mind to forego a saving throw or special resistance.

[Andezzar]

Additionally being mindless is not a special imunity to magic, it is being an invalid target for mind-affecting abilities. Just as you cannot dominate a chair, you cannot dominate a mindless creature.
If however an intelligent creature somehow acquired immunity to mind-affecting abilities, it could suppress that immunity.