Can you trick someone into Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw?

Corran

Explorer
Can you trick someone into Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw against a different spell that you say you are going to cast?

For example:

Wizard: "I'm gonna cast a spell on you now that will let me see through your eyes, but for it to work I need you to give up your safe."

Not too smart target: "Yeah, sure."

Wizard casts Dominate Person and the target voluntarily gives up his save.

Does the above work? I can't find anywhere that the target would be able to sense that it is the wrong spell and make a save at the last minute.

These are the related rules that I could find:

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.

Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Kobold Marine

First Post
Corran said:
Does the above work?
Yes. If the DM wants, there can be Bluff/Sense Motive checks involved beforehand.
Corran said:
I can't find anywhere that the target would be able to sense that it is the wrong spell and make a save at the last minute.
It depends on how lenient the DM is. I'd recommend a Spellcraft check, then an opposed initiative roll to determine if the target can do anything about it.
 


Nifft

Penguin Herder
Sure. Spellcraft and Sense Motive are your defenses against people doing this regularly.

It's best if you make it so the target can't make a Spellcraft check. My favorite idea for this is, "hey, I'm going to scry you at 5:45 PM tonight so I can check up on you and possibly teleport to your location; fail a Will save around then, would you?"

Then, be invisible and cast a Silent Dominate Person.

Cheers, -- N
 


SadisticFishing

First Post
Nah, it's in the nature of "making a save". Your body (even will) automatically reacts to things that it knows are bad for it. Or at least that's what I figure :p
 

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...
SadisticFishing said:
Actually, I'm pretty sure you can tell when a spell is "Harmless" as it's cast on you, and whether or not to resist.

I don't think you can... but the Harmless descriptor works for you anyway.

If someone casts a Will negates spell on me, and I don't voluntarily elect to give up my saving throw, I will automatically attempt a save. Thus, even if I'm unconscious, I still have a defence against Dominate Person. (Note that 'considered a willing target' and 'considered to forego a Will save' are completely separate concepts.)

If someone casts a Will negates (harmless) spell on me, I do not automatically attempt a save; however, I may elect to do so. Thus, if I'm unconscious, I have no defence against Lesser Restoration.

So if someone tells you they're casting a harmless spell, don't voluntarily give up your save; rather, make no decision regarding the save. If it's harmless you automatically won't attempt a save, and if it isn't, you automatically will attempt a save.

For the bluff to work, you'll have to choose a spell that is hypothetically beneficial but which is not described as harmless, so that the target must voluntarily forego his save in order for it to take effect.

-Hyp.
 


Felix

Explorer
SadisticFishing said:
Nah, it's in the nature of "making a save". Your body (even will) automatically reacts to things that it knows are bad for it. Or at least that's what I figure :p
Thus the question of, "If you're convinced to give up a save, will you?"

Is it possible to intentionally fail a save? Yes.

Is this a conscious action? Yes.

Can a character convince another to do something? Yes.

You may realize when the spell has been cast that you've been betrayed, but have it be too late to do anything about it.



Re: Hyp

That sounds very much like either metagame knowledge, or knowledge a Spellcraft or Knowledge (arcane) would provide. It certainly doesn't seem like knowledge automatically distributed to PCs.
 
Last edited:

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...
Felix said:
That sounds very much like either metagame knowledge, or knowledge a Spellcraft or Knowledge (arcane) would provide. It certainly doesn't seem like knowledge automatically distributed to PCs.

Isn't "I want you to elect to fail this saving throw" a metagame concept as well?

-Hyp.
 

Hypersmurf said:
Isn't "I want you to elect to fail this saving throw" a metagame concept as well?

Only if you phrase it that way.

"I want you to fail your save" is metagame.

"I'm going to cast a spell; try not to fight it" is perfectly in-character.
 

Kahuna Burger

First Post
It is possible that it "should" be allowed by a sympathetic reading of the rules for voluntarily failing a save. It's definite that I "would" never allow it without a special feat and a hefty bluff check. ;) I simply wouldn't allow as significant balancing factor as saves be skipped that easily.
 

ElectricDragon

Explorer
Even if you elected to give up your save, wouldn't you get to change your mind at the last minute if you had ranks in Spellcraft and made the roll to determine the spell was detrimental to your health?

Ciao
Dave
 

Twowolves

Explorer
As far as the RAW go, I see no reason not to allow someone to con someone into foregoing a save. In fact, I've had PCs convince other PCs to forego a save, versus Charm no less!

If a PC is gullible enough to let his actively choose to lower his guard, he gets what he deserves. In the case of PC vs NPC, Bluff vs Sense Motive seems appropriate.
 

Jack Simth

First Post
Ah, there we go - neither Enlarge Person nor Reduce Person have the (Harmless) tag. So if the target thinks you'll be casting one of those, any ranged Fort save spell will do the job - provided they can't beat your Bluff, or don't have Spellcraft to identify it's characteristics (such as the one-round casting time).
 

Felix

Explorer
Hypersmurf said:
Isn't "I want you to elect to fail this saving throw" a metagame concept as well?

-Hyp.
What the vampiric flying mouse said.

It's like the dentist saying, "this isn't going to hurt a bit, so relax"; you know it will hurt, but you try to be calm and let it happen.
 

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...
Felix said:
What the vampiric flying mouse said.

It's like the dentist saying, "this isn't going to hurt a bit, so relax"; you know it will hurt, but you try to be calm and let it happen.

But he's never had to specifically relax for a cure spell, or a fly spell, or an invisibility spell.

And it's why I think the caster needs to be careful what he picks as his Bluff. If it's a spell the target hasn't experienced, then Spellcraft will tell him whether it's harmless or not. But if it's a spell he has experienced, then Spellcraft or no Spellcraft, he may remember that there was no special calming or relaxing required last time...

-Hyp.
 

Felix

Explorer
Hypersmurf said:
And it's why I think the caster needs to be careful what he picks as his Bluff. If it's a spell the target hasn't experienced, then Spellcraft will tell him whether it's harmless or not. But if it's a spell he has experienced, then Spellcraft or no Spellcraft, he may remember that there was no special calming or relaxing required last time...
So you admit the possibility, then, and merely caution how it's done?
 

roguerouge

First Post
Dude, that's what bard spells are all about:

"I'm going to cast a spell on you, don't resist it."
"Okay."
Cure light wounds.
"I'm going to cast another cure spell. Don't resist it."
"Okay."
Charm person.

Presto!
 

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...
Felix said:
So you admit the possibility, then, and merely caution how it's done?

Oh, sure.

I'm basically saying "Pick your bluff carefully", because the mechanics of saving vs harmless and non-harmless spells are different.

If you choose a bluff that uses the same mechanic as what you're actually casting, you're less likely to have that bluff called.

-Hyp.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top