Daze vs. Freedom of Movement

[Artoomis]

Technically, going by the letter of the rules, I would have to say movement is NOT an action - it's a move. Remember, a person's turn is Move + Std. Action. Therefore, stunning and dazing wouldn't necessarily be contered by freedom of movement - you can be dazed or stunned, and still move all you want, including away from the battle...

I don't think so.

...In a normal round, you can perform a standard action and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action...

However, Freedom of Movement most certainly only applies to effects that restrict movement.

I read

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.

to mean that effects that impede movement are applicable, effects that stop ALL actions, including purely mental ones, are not.

Common sense must be applied here, as overly-strict reading of the rules will lead to odd results as noted in other posts above.

 

[Henry]

I don't think so.


However, Freedom of Movement most certainly only applies to effects that restrict movement.

I read to mean that effects that impede movement are applicable, effects that stop ALL actions, including purely mental ones, are not.

Perhaps I misunderstand you, because that's what I thought I said in my post.

In other words, Freedom of Movement would not stop a Daze or a stunned condition, because they don't stop you from moving. Or am I misunderstanding?

 

[Artoomis]

Perhaps I misunderstand you, because that's what I thought I said in my post.

In other words, Freedom of Movement would not stop a Daze or a stunned condition, because they don't stop you from moving. Or am I misunderstanding?

Right. But you also said that "Move" is not an action, and that's not true, it is it's own action type - "Move Action."

You conclusion was correct, but the reasoning of "Move" not being an "Action" was not. That's all I was attempting to straighten out.

 

[Henry]

You conclusion was correct, but the reasoning of "Move" not being an "Action" was not.

Ah. 10-4.

 

[Norfleet]

Here's an interesting question: What happens if somebody affected by FoM is hogtied with ordinary, mundane rope? Is he still able to move? It's not a magical effect or a grapple check, but it certainly impedes movement. If yes, what does he look like when moving about normally while hogtied?

The subject is also able to move about while underwater. Does "underwater" extend to other water-based media, such as wet cement, mud, acid, etc.? What about non-waterbased liquid media, such as oil or glycerin? What if the subject is underwater, and the water is frozen, or the cement hardens? Is he now immobilized by being frozen in ice or trapped in cement, or can he move freely through the ice and cement?

 

[FrankTrollman]

Here's an interesting question: What happens if somebody affected by FoM is hogtied with ordinary, mundane rope?

Then the recipient of FoM automatically succeeds on the escape artist check to break free.

-Frank

 

[AuraSeer]

What if the subject is underwater, and the water is frozen, or the cement hardens? Is he now immobilized by being frozen in ice or trapped in cement, or can he move freely through the ice and cement?

IMO, if the character were allowed a save to get out of the liquid before it solidified, he would automatically succeed. But the spell wouldn't get him out if he had no avenue to escape-- if he were at the bottom of a 100' well that froze from the top down, he'd be out of luck.

I wouldn't let the character automatically phase through the ice, but I'd probably allow him to move freely in a small unfrozen "bubble" just large enough to contain him. He could tunnel his way out the hard way, assuming he could live long enough without air or food.

This is just my interpretation, though. I don't think the rules clearly specify what happens in a case like this.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Hold person description states :
"The subject becomes paralyzed and freezes in place. It is aware and breathes normally but cannot take any actions, even speech."

Means no spellcasting, even with no components.

Except that the description of the paralyzed condition allows for purely mental actions.

So it comes down to a question of - Does Hold Person confer the paralyzed condition, which it briefly describes as "cannot take any actions", although the condition description elaborates on that somewhat? Or does Hold Person confer the paralyzed condition, with the additional effect that the subject "cannot take any actions"?

-Hyp.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

On a first glance, it seems to be clear: Freedom of Movement works fine against daze effects:



In MoF is a nasty level 8 spell from Thay, named Nybor's Wrathful Castigation. If the target fails its save, it is killed, if not, it is dazed for the duration of the spell (1 round per caster level). Which means that it is more or less dead anyway.
I'll take over in DMing soon and I'm not sure if Nybor's spell needs a change because FoF offers protection or not. If FoF protects from daze effects (I'm inlcined to say it does), I'll rule NWC's daze effect to 1d4+1 rounds (on par with Otto's Irresistable Dance). If FoF does not help, I tend to ban NWC.

Thanks for comments!

The Dark Dragon

Which book is this published in? This seems way more powerful than Otto's Irresistable Dance - it's like it has a combined heightened slay living effect in it.

Maybe I need to send an email to WotC. I'm hoping someone is going to tell me that the spell isn't actually written like that.

 

[FrankTrollman]

It's from Magic of Faerun - which I'll remind you is banned in many circles for providing too many infinite power combos. So it's not a balanced book, not by any means.

As to being better than Otto's Irresistable Dance - I would say that it is. Because it doesn't require an attack roll. In either case, you are basically dead when facing the 15th level enemy who can cast this spell.

Regardless, it is a "Red Wizard" spell, which in Faerun is normally gained by virtue of being a Specialist Wizard (Enchanter) who is a member of an elite and powerful order of Enchanters - or defeating same in combat and capturing one of their books.

So basically it's like an ability of the Red Wizard Prestige Class - when you get to character level 15 you get NWC instead of OID. It's better - significantly so. It's supposed to be, you have to go through a whole lot of work to get that spell.

Whether that's "balanced" depends entirely upon whether you are the kind of DM who will allow the Fighter, with similar questing and effort, to gain powerful magical swords and armor. If you are, then you probably shouldn't be whining about Wizards being able to quest for more powerful spells - which is exactly what NWC is. It's a quest reward and a powerful high level spell.

-Frank