Play-Testing Hold Person

[GX.Sigma]

That should say now "Hold Creature".

It's always been hold person at low levels and hold monster at higher levels, and there's really no need to change it now.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I agree, that hold person should hold the person in place. It should not fall to the ground. (So stunned seems more appropriate than paralyze)

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

[MENTION=85179]ren1999[/MENTION] I think one thread would be preferable, or perhaps grouping some spells together (like holds/charms here).

Ok, time to address the actual spell:

I like the HP threshold, but I suppose an alternative would be a level threshold. That's if monsters have 'levels'. It's not clear if they will have a way for DMs to figure out when a monster is appropriate a challenge or not. If they can use something simple like 'level', then resistances to certain magic could be easily expressed as 'this creature is x levels higher against these spells/effects'.

I would rather have these mind-affecting spells combined, rather than there being person/monster/everything ever types. I'd like to see the following spells presented in no particular order:

Charm - only works on something non-hostile, makes them like you, almost entirely for social interaction purposes. They won't do things they wouldn't normally do for a casual friend. They don't know they are charmed, and when it runs out they aren't aware either (other than perhaps feeling like the caster has been a bad friend, or they have been too nice today or something - repeated use might give the game away).

Calm - works on hostile creatures, allowing for social interaction or escape. They don't know they are calmed, and essentially treat the caster/allies as strangers. After it runs out they may or may not be hostile again, depending on the situation (so a calmed guard who catches you stealing would become hostile again and report you if you have escaped, but a commoner in a bar fight because you insulted his mother might leave you alone).

Frenzy - to counter Calm, they will attack anyone and anything they can. Everyone appears hostile to them, and intelligence goes out the window, so that the nearest person, or the one who last attacked them gets attacked. Powerful, so low thresholds.

Distraction - they will ignore the caster, though not his allies. Any deliberate interaction will obviously break this effect, and victims might have the nagging feeling that they are missing something. Used in combat for defence (the caster won't be attacked if they don't break the effect) or for stealth purposes (doesn't make you invisible, but will make it easier to sneak around). When it's over you won't realised you were distracted unless there are obvious consequences, such as the crown jewels are missing.

Sleep - the victim falls unconcious, but will be awoken by anything that hits them, or moves them or otherwise rouses them (seriously loud noises for instance, but not just background battle noise). Powerful, so low thresholds again.

Stun - the victim is stunned, finding it difficult to move and act, I think this is currently disadv on everything and adv on attacks on the victim.

Confusion - the victim acts randomly, everyone's favourite! They'll still defend themselves normally, but it's a toss-up whether they are calmed, frenzied or act normally.

Paralyse - this is how hold should work, paralysing the victim. It should be quite high-level (or if using thresholds, have low ones). They are unable to move or act other than mentally.

Dominate - gives the caster complete control of the victims actions, simple as that.

Whether these spells are available at all levels (with different thresholds) or later levels depends on the magic system. If they go for a spell-slot-level-determines-power system (please oh please) then I don't see a harm in them being available at all levels, albeit with different linear scalings. Effects can be ordered by power level, which is roughly Charm, Calm, Distract, Sleep, Frenzy, Stun, Confuse, Paralyse, Dominate and assigned thresholds that scale accordingly, or be available at a certain level accordingly.

 

[Bagpuss]

range line of sight - seems a fine range for playing in a dungeon with narrow sight lines, but seriously over powered on an open plain. Imagine a battlefield where the mages sit off miles away from the conflict in no danger and Hold and Sleep enemies, for the fighters to finish off.

I don't think line of sight works as a range for spells IMHO. Command Foe for example should at least require you to be close enough for the enemy to hear the command.

 

[RangerWickett]

The purpose of an HP threshold is so that you don't end a fight as soon as you roll initiative. I win init, you're paralyzed, and we coup de grace you. That's a) not dramatic, and b) can sabotage fun for climactic fights.

Now it is c) fun when you're taking out people who aren't dramatically important, because it shows you're a bad-ass. But I'd much prefer a 'boss fight' to require a bit of dueling before you can deliver the knock-out blow with a spell like hold person, polymorph, or sleep.

Basing it off level won't have the desired result. It would prevent you from ever holding, polymorphing, sleeping, etceteraing bosses.

 

[Boarstorm]

I am against having attack rolls for non-"attack" spells. That's what the saving throw mechanic is there for. And this is probably the first time I've seen MAD being suggested as a good thing. Following these suggestions, a wizard could be good at enchantments OR his other spells. Good, perhaps, for an enchanter theme (with other benefits), but very bad for a generalist.

 

[Gryph]

The purpose of an HP threshold is so that you don't end a fight as soon as you roll initiative. I win init, you're paralyzed, and we coup de grace you. That's a) not dramatic, and b) can sabotage fun for climactic fights.

Now it is c) fun when you're taking out people who aren't dramatically important, because it shows you're a bad-ass. But I'd much prefer a 'boss fight' to require a bit of dueling before you can deliver the knock-out blow with a spell like hold person, polymorph, or sleep.

Basing it off level won't have the desired result. It would prevent you from ever holding, polymorphing, sleeping, etceteraing bosses.

I think the intention was to moderate the Save or Suck spells this pass rather than eliminate them (or nearly eliminate them) like they did in 4.

What you posted became a very happy property of the design approach they took.

The other thing the HP limit enables is a (to me) better fiction conceit for capturing an opponent. I like the flavor of throwing a hold or sleep on an enemy that's been fought down to near death over the hand-wavy "non-lethal" final blow. That's just a matter of personal taste though, RangerWickett hit the best parts.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

The purpose of an HP threshold is so that you don't end a fight as soon as you roll initiative. I win init, you're paralyzed, and we coup de grace you. That's a) not dramatic, and b) can sabotage fun for climactic fights.

Now it is c) fun when you're taking out people who aren't dramatically important, because it shows you're a bad-ass. But I'd much prefer a 'boss fight' to require a bit of dueling before you can deliver the knock-out blow with a spell like hold person, polymorph, or sleep.

Basing it off level won't have the desired result. It would prevent you from ever holding, polymorphing, sleeping, etceteraing bosses.

You make a very good point. HP thresholds are the way forward. What are your thoughts on scaling these thresholds (presuming spells can be prepared in different slots, which we er, haven't seen yet despite it being talked about once)? I think it's important that they do so linearly, but at different rates depending on spell power (10hp per spell level for sleep, 5hp per spell level for dominate or something).

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

You make a very good point. HP thresholds are the way forward. What are your thoughts on scaling these thresholds (presuming spells can be prepared in different slots, which we er, haven't seen yet despite it being talked about once)? I think it's important that they do so linearly, but at different rates depending on spell power (10hp per spell level for sleep, 5hp per spell level for dominate or something).

This is a good idea for two reasons.

1. It makes the spell more powerful if prepared at a higher level, which is cool.

2. As damage and hit points increase at higher levels, the hit point range in which sleep is most effective becomes increasingly easy to miss entirely. If a monster has 15 hit points but has to be at 10 or below to be effective by the spell, your next attack is more likely to drop the monster to zero than leave it vulnerable to the spell you want to cast. Increasing the HP threshold widens this window.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I like the flavor of the HP threshold, but it does create a weird situation where lower-HP characters are weaker against spells that don't necessarily have anything to do with CON.

For example, based on the HP progression for leveling on the playtest characters, the wizard won't hit 40 HP until level 13, while the fighter hits it at level 5. (And both of those characters have 14 CON, although Pelor knows what it's doing for the wizard given that he's only gaining 2 HP per level.) The fighter also (for some reason) has a higher Wisdom score than the wizard, so he even has a better shot at making the saving throw.

This is kind of the opposite of what I'd expect. Shouldn't a wizard be better against mental domination than a big dumb fighter? What does HP (whatever it represents) have to do with his ability to shake off mental spell effects?

From what I understand, spell DCs aren't tied to spell level in 5e, so even cast as a second-level spell, this will continue to be deadly against squishy units into the paragon levels. Without seeing higher-level characters, we can't really say that this is overpowered, but it seems like an odd trendline compared to, say, the direct-damage spells that clearly taper off in relative power pretty quickly. (Would a 12th-level wizard EVER prepare Arc Lightning when he could use the same spell slot for Hold Person?)

By the way, does "cannot move" in the spell description just mean you can't take move actions, but you can still cast spells, etc?