Gaming W/Jemal: Legends (3.5e d&D) *Recruitment Closed*

[Shayuri]

Actually, I dispute that interpretation. Let me quote.

This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement...

Lets break it down. It lets you move and attack normally for the duration of the spell.

This is the case EVEN if you're under the effect of magic that normally impedes movement. Not ONLY if. EVEN if. That's not a qualifier, it's an includer. The subject of Freedom of Movement "moves and attacks normally for the duration of the spell."

An Ex ability wouldn't make any difference. A spider shooting a web, for example, wouldn't work any more than the Web spell. Paralysis from a feat wouldn't be any more effective than paralysis from a spell.

---

Edit - And because I'm obsessive, here's a bit from Wizards Q&A on a related subject.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ask/20080222a

The question being answered is whether or not Freedom of Movement is effective against a mimic's adhesive...to which they answer yes. When I look up the mimic's stats, I see the adhesive is an Ex ability. This isn't a direct match, but it does establish a precedent for FoM not only being effective against magic, water and grapples.

 

[OnlytheStrong]

I did read that we aren't supposed to post IC until we're set and approved right?

 

[Rathan]

I would wait for Jemal to give you the thumbs up and a go to post yes Only.. sorry :/

 

[Roronoa]

Shayuri: While its true the DMs interpritation did not account for the 'Even' in the description of Freedom of Movement, what your missing is that paralysis isn't included in the list of what Freedom of Movement prevents.

"This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web."

While this doesn't say that paralysis isn't prevented by Freedom of Movement, it in no way specifically states that non-magical Paralysis is prevented. At this point, for non-magical effects, it seems like the DM has to interpret.

Furthermore, when one breaks down what Freedom of Movement actually prevents, you begin to see that while external effects are covered (I.E. Adhesives, Web, Magical Influences) you don't have things like stunning being added to the list, despite the fact that it prevents you from taking your move action. This is because the problem is with you, not from your surroundings. Hence there is nothing for Freedom of Movement to do. It can't grant you the ability to walk, it only prevents things from getting in your way. Since the Paralysis caused by the feat is an extention of Stunning Fist, I feel it falls into the same catagory.

If Freedom of Movement could prevent personal ailments from affecting your movement, then theoretically it could cause handicapped people to function normally again. After all, thats where the term Paralyzed is derived from. And some would say not being able to walk doesn't qualify as moving normally. This is a use I don't think was ever intended for.

I do however suggest a compramise on this issue, since the distinction between non-magic and magic paralysis is an important one. If the DM decides to rule that Freedom of Movement does not in fact stop the Paralysis, then Shayuri should be allowed to restate his contingency to include Magical Paralysis and prevent the wasted expenditure.

 

[Rathan]

I'm sorry.. I have to speak up here.... Paralysis impedes movement... It's the loss of ability to use a certain part of the body.. if it's your legs.. or your brain that controls motor function.. then that surely DOES impede movement as I see it... Paralysis is mentioned in passage.. they made a point to put it in there and the word even was as well leading people who read it carefully to believe that it's encompassing not only non-magical forms of paralysis but also magic paralysis in whatever form it may come in...

I for one think Shayuri has read the passage and it's slightly underdeveloped description correctly....

 

[Shayuri]

I'm not sure where stunning got into this. Freedom of Movement doesn't in any way protect against conditions that cause you to be unable to take actions. Stunning, dazing, unconsciousness...these are all conditions that can make it impossible to move, but that Freedom of Movement won't guard against. Why? Because they don't interfere with movement...rather, they interfere with the kind of actions you can take. Another kind of example of this might be a Suggestion to "Stop moving." Freedom of Movement wouldn't protect against that, because the magic is forcing you to choose not to move, rather than directly interfering with your ability to move.

Contrast that with what it DOES guard against. Entanglement, paralysis, slow, and so on. All conditions that specifically, and explicitly, interfere with movement. In particular, they're all physical effects...things affecting the body that cause it to be unable to move properly.

The difference seems pretty intuitive and clear cut to me.

 

[Voidrazor]

I'm pretty open on Dieties, just tell me who/what it is and their available domains and i'm 99% sure it'll be ok.

Ideally I'd like Neith as an intermediate LN goddess with War, Renewal, Mysticism, and Planning as her domains.

 

[Myth and Legend]

*EDIT: Just waiting on Myth to post Siliv's attempts to break free.

Uh, am i missing something here? The bear swiped at Sila, dealt some damage, triggered her Greater Blink Contingency, and then was wished away by a benign transposition. Now she has the feral in front of her who (tahnkfuly) attacked the melee warrior to the south, rather then her. If so, Sila has a Greater Blink active and can now happily cast spells?

BTW, that failed save on feeblemind could have meant instant death if i had packed a Ray of Stupidity... This will be amended for the next fight (provided there is a magical shop nearby that i can Teleport to)

Also, spell turning and absorption have 10min/level durations do they count as permanent buffs if i have only one of each prepared?

 

[Roronoa]

I'm sorry.. I have to speak up here.... Paralysis impedes movement... It's the loss of ability to use a certain part of the body.. if it's your legs.. or your brain that controls motor function.. then that surely DOES impede movement as I see it... Paralysis is mentioned in passage.. they made a point to put it in there and the word even was as well leading people who read it carefully to believe that it's encompassing not only non-magical forms of paralysis but also magic paralysis in whatever form it may come in...

I for one think Shayuri has read the passage and it's slightly underdeveloped description correctly....

This goes back to the question then. Does Freedom of Movement allow the handicapped to walk?

Does it allow people with broken legs to move normally?

Does it negate the hamstring feat?

You guys are implying that physical damage is ignored by by Freedom of Movement, and isn't really something I agree with. Because this version of Paralysis is a physcial effect on the person. Brainstem damage is realy damage, and I don't think Freedom of Movement heals that.

Also, Paralysis is mentioned in the passage of magical suggestions specifically because Hold Person comes in several spell variations.

 

[Jemal]

'hokay, lotta stuff to go over...

Uh, am i missing something here? The bear swiped at Sila, dealt some damage, triggered her Greater Blink Contingency, and then was wished away by a benign transposition. Now she has the feral in front of her who (tahnkfuly) attacked the melee warrior to the south, rather then her. If so, Sila has a Greater Blink active and can now happily cast spells?

Sorry, got her and Sabastian mixed up, you're not grappled.
Also keep in mind to point out contingencies when they happen, with 10 PC's if it isn't in your little combat post I won't be seeing it. There'll be a little lee-way for the first round or two as you guys get used to including the info, but after that if it's not in the combat post then it doesn't exist for that round.

You do still need to post an action, though.

BTW, that failed save on feeblemind could have meant instant death if i had packed a Ray of Stupidity... This will be amended for the next fight (provided there is a magical shop nearby that i can Teleport to)

Good luck with that. *Evil grin* I've gone on record in numerous games that I dislike instant death. I've also informed you all in this thread that I believe in the 'mutually assured destruction'& 'Eye for an Eye' modes of GMing. If you guys start using instadeath, so will I.

Also, there's not going to be an opportunity to go shopping for a while unless
A: You decide not to go on this quest
B: you're a wayfarer guide capable of teleporting long distances
C: you pay the XP to gate/planeshift.

Also, spell turning and absorption have 10min/level durations do they count as permanent buffs if i have only one of each prepared?

Daily buffs are those that are permanent, last 1 hour/lvl or more, OR 10min/lvl spells that you will recast automatically anytime it's duration runs out (Meaning you have to 'set aside' enough slots at the begining of each day to do so, and cannot use those slots for other spells).

IE: Mage armour is 1hr/lvl, so it's a daily buff.
See Invis is only 10 min/lvl, so unless it's permanent you'd need to set aside enough 2nd level spell slots to cast it 6 times/day(Essentially making it 1hr/lvl)

I've bolded the parts from my initial post that pertain to your question, b/c I'm not sure how else to explain it. Basically with a caster level of 18-24 you'd have to cast it 6 times per day to have it count as a 'daily buff'.


Voidrazor - What book did you find that has an intermediate godess with 4 domains? Or are you just asking for what you'd like her to have?

Tagret - Sorry, didn't realize you were finished your character. I'll go over him for approval.



RE: Freedom of Movement

I counter your link with my own
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ask/20080226a
According to THIS link, freedom of Movement should only stop 'physcial' limitations, not mental ones.
The problem with 'official' answers is that they tend to just make things more complicated and contradictory. For example this link states that under the answerers ruling, Hold Person would not be prevented by Freedom of Movement.. which is, I think we both agree, bogus.

I think my whole problem with the spell is pointed out in this answer's first line " Freedom of movement is one of those tricky spells that has a lot of open-ended wording that might lead to confusion." Yeah, understatement much?

I'm not sure where you got the "actions vs Movement" Argument, I've never heard that one before, and you're using examples that don't appear in the book, so I must assume this is your own personal opinion, just as I have allready shared mine.

Back to your first response

This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement...

Lets break it down. It lets you move and attack normally for the duration of the spell.

This is the case EVEN if you're under the effect of magic that normally impedes movement. Not ONLY if. EVEN if. That's not a qualifier, it's an includer. The subject of Freedom of Movement "moves and attacks normally for the duration of the spell."

If the subject 'moves and attacks normally for the duration of the spell' and THAT is the line that matters, then it WOULD make you immune to ANYTHING that would stop you from doing so, regardless of whether it does so by preventing actions, movement, etc. Death prevents you from moving and acting normally. So does unconsciousnes. So does sleep. So does dexterity damage. So does wearing heavy armour, etc.

Many spells have the problem of mixing flavour text with rules text and this completely messes with the spell, as I believe is the case with Freedom of Movement.
I believe that the first sentence of the spell is a poor combination of flavour text (Enables you to move and attack normally" and rules text "Magic that impedes your movement such as..."



*Edit: Also, this is my 6,666th post, just had to say that. I may dissapear into a puff of smoke shortly, so if you don't hear from me soon.. SEND HELP!!! *L*