Freedom of Movement doesn't work on Hold Person?!

[Ovinomancer]

This topic was derived from a discussion on last Sunday's Game. It started with Otto's Dance not being affected by FoM because it doesn't restrict movment, it is a compulsion affect that MAKES you want to move that way. So, the thought came up that Hold Person has the same descriptors as Otto's, namely a mid-affecting compulsion, so, if the logic holds, FoM doesn't help a Held person. Your thoughts?

Hold Person
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]
Level: Brd 2, Clr 2, Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S, F/DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target: One humanoid creature
Duration: 1 round/level (D); see text
Saving Throw: Will negates; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes
The subject becomes paralyzed and freezes in place. It is aware and breathes normally but cannot take any actions, even speech. Each round on its turn, the subject may attempt a new saving throw to end the effect. (This is a full-round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.)
A winged creature who is paralyzed cannot flap its wings and falls. A swimmer can’t swim and may drown.
Arcane Focus: A small, straight piece of iron.

Freedom of Movement
Abjuration
Level: Brd 4, Clr 4, Drd 4, Luck 4, Rgr 4
Components: V, S, M, DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal or touch
Target: You or creature touched
Duration: 10 min./level
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
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. The subject automatically succeeds on any grapple check made to resist a grapple attempt, as well as on grapple checks or Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin.
The spell also allows the subject to move and attack normally while underwater, even with slashing weapons such as axes and swords or with bludgeoning weapons such as flails, hammers, and maces, provided that the weapon is wielded in the hand rather than hurled. The freedom of movement spell does not, however, allow water breathing.
Material Component: A leather thong, bound around the arm or a similar appendage.

 

[3d6]

I think it is apparent that hold person is "magic that usually impedes movement", as it paralyzes you. Thus, freedom of movement should work against it. Of course, I would think that otto's irresistable dance would be considered to "impede movement" as well, as it forces you to stay in one place. I mean, "the spell effect makes it impossible for the subject to do anything other than caper and prance in place" is an impediment to movement.

 

[two]

I don't see where Freedom of Movement makes a distiction, implied in your question, between mental and non-mental compulsary movement restriction.

Hold Person says "paralyzed" and Freedom of Movement says it works vs. "Paralysis".

Freedom of Movement does not say it only works vs. paralysis generated from a physical source (poison, etc.).

In general, it's unlikely you want to open up a can of worms to debate what is, or isn't, a "compulsion" or mental-choice restricted movement effect. Just do the dumb straight-forward thing. Does Hold Person restrict movement? Yes. Apply Freedom of Movement. PC can move normally. Done.

 

[Darklone]

Well... being held is mentioned IIRC in the Freedom of Movement description though it doesn't make sense... Hold Person doesn't paralyze you, it's an enchantment... guess you could describe it as a real good distraction

 

[two]

El Doublino

 

[two]

Well... being held is mentioned IIRC in the Freedom of Movement description though it doesn't make sense... Hold Person doesn't paralyze you, it's an enchantment... guess you could describe it as a real good distraction

Except for the part of Hold Person where it states: "The subject becomes paralyzed and freezes in place."

I know what you mean, though. It's all in his head. Still, Freedom of Movement does not say it prevents only paralysis that comes from sources other than that which is "all in the head" does it?

 

[Sejs]

Freedom of Movement:

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...

Hold Person:

The subject becomes paralyzed...

 

[Thanee]

I also think, that FoM should work against Hold Person.

Then again, as stated in the thread about Otto's... the logic, why FoM does not work on Otto's would apply to Hold Person as well.

I think Hold Person is just a very special case here, since it is a Compulsion and has the paralysis effect. FoM specifically helps against paralysis, so it should work against Hold Person, altho in general I do not think it should work on Compulsion/Mind-influencing effects, that dictate your movement.

I do find it strange, that FoM works against Hold Person, I just think, because of the stating of paralysis it does. If it wouldn't say 'paralyzed' in the spell's description, I think I wouldn't even think about the possibility, that FoM would help here...

Bye
Thanee

 

[Ovinomancer]

The real question with hold person is whether or not it imposes the paralyzed condition. Yes, it states that the target is paralyzed, but is this flavor text, colorful description, or a reference to the condition. FoM works against the paralyzed condition, but not against the paralyzed flavor text.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I don't see where Freedom of Movement makes a distiction, implied in your question, between mental and non-mental compulsary movement restriction.

If this is the case, then a dominated person under FoM that is given a command to stay put doesn't have to because that impedes his movement.

Hold Person says "paralyzed" and Freedom of Movement says it works vs. "Paralysis".

See above post on the possible flavor text usage of the word paralysed.

Freedom of Movement does not say it only works vs. paralysis generated from a physical source (poison, etc.).

All of the examples, however, refer to physical restraint of movement.

In general, it's unlikely you want to open up a can of worms to debate what is, or isn't, a "compulsion" or mental-choice restricted movement effect. Just do the dumb straight-forward thing. Does Hold Person restrict movement? Yes. Apply Freedom of Movement. PC can move normally. Done.

Ah... but this is precisely the can that I wanted to open.

Disclaimer... The above is me playing with hong's shtick.
All rights are reserved by hong.