![]() Limiting it to physical restraints only has no basis of justification in the wording and thus is not a justified argument as a universal interpretation.Īnd what says that the held person is choosing not to move? It can just as easily be that the spell makes the person think they can’t move in which case that’s clearly magic impeding movement and thus FoM would suppress the effect. It noticeably states magical effects not physical magic effects. That means FoM’s text stating movement is impeded should not apply since nothing is impeding your movement, you are choosing not to move.Įxcept as I stated earlier there is nothing in FoM that says its limited to physical effects. ![]() How is this different than suggestion: Leave me alone or dominate: attack your friends? Hold person is just a specialized form of compulsion that tells you not to move.Īccording t the CRB: Compulsion: A compulsion spell forces the subject to act in some manner or changes the way its mind works. The fact it is a compulsion places this in the same camp as suggestion or dominate person/monster. I think this is probably the strongert argument I have seen for Hold Person to defeat FoM. (And are thus, for game mechanics purposes treated as having the paralyzed condition.) It is an enchantment (compulsion) spell that compels you to choose to do nothing. The King In Yellow wrote: Hold person is. In this case, it's all paralysis-based for hold person. It makes sense when you look at the rules from a learning tool standpoint, where that would be the most likely place a player would run across the terminology and how it applied in game. Certainly GMs could get the rulings elsewhere or had a glossary, but for the longest time, players were not considered to be privy to the GM rules or handbooks. Those were the first common encounter that players would have with those circumstances. ![]() Similar to how sleep probably is a bit more detailed than later spells that cause creatures to fall asleep, or how barkskin contains the rules-notation on a creature without a natural armor counting as having natural armor +0, or how lightning bolt or fireball provide precedent or examples of how they interact with intervening barriers or potentially ignite flammables. Since hold person is (or at least was for the longest time) the lowest level spell a PC would be expected to get or encounter that caused paralysis, they gave it a little more clarification on what happens to a target. Like most spells, the basis for many conditions and states are laid out in the spells that cause them (typically found in the lowest level or first expected available spell to cause them). Hold person is a paralysis effect, the part about being able to breath and be aware but not be able to speak is not a separate effect of the spell. Does paralysis immunity protect from Hold Person?įreedom of movement protects against hold person. So Hold Person should easily be overridden by Freedom of Movement. Unless stated otherwise immunity is to the effect, not the source. This means that it doesn't matter if the effect is mental or physical it only matters as far as bonuses or immunity to mind-affecting effects. (However, other effects from these things can still affect him if he's not immune to them.) While this makes some sense for him to be immune to the supernatural and poison effects, it doesn't make sense that he's able to ignore the effects of holy chains holding him in place yet he does ignore it since it is explicitly stated to be paralysis. ![]() Yet Ichor the 10th level Alchemist with Mummification is immune to all of the paralysis effect of each of these since he is immune to paralysis. Some are clearly purely mental like the mummy's aura while Chains of Light is physical as dodging the chains with a reflex negates the entire effect. Mummy dispair aura, poisons like Tears of Death, ghast's paralyzing touch, and the spell Chains of Light all cause paralysis but in completely different ways. The problem is that there are multiple wildly different ways for a character to attain the same negative condition. ![]() Freedom of Movement doesn't say anything about it being limited to physical effects only. Even if it is a mental effect, so are some other forms of paralysis. My opinion, Freedom of Movement should override Hold Person. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |