Get pedantic on Feeblemind

[Artoomis]

As I said above... the complete text isn't in the SRD, it's only in the PHB.

Bye
Thanee

Other than deleting the invalid example of Flesh to Stone, there is no significant difference between the PHB text and the SRD text.

Ragardless, you are not still trying to say that Break Enchantment was not meant to reverse instantaneous effects (enchantments, transmutations and curses) of fifth spell level or lower, are you?

 

[Artoomis]

Yep.

He has a point, though, that it is kinda weird, that BE affects instantaneous effects.

There isn't really anything to break left. You can only restore (or should be able to, anyways).

Bye
Thanee

Yep. Break Enchantment is a little misnamed. However:

"Fix Magical Misfortune" while possibly more accurate, is really not as cool a spell name.

 

[sirwmholder]

How, then, do you interpret the line in which Break Enchantment specifically says it can reverse instantaneous effects?

Daniel

Personally, I would line item veto that single line... seems to not fit with the spirit of the spell and creates more confusion than it should be.

Thank you for your time,
Wm. Holder

 

[evilbob]

I don't think it's been mentioned yet why it would be so bad to allow break enchantment to work.

I skipped some of this thread due to the back-and-forth nature of it, so I don't know if this point has already been made: but, I generally agree with the idea that BE should be able to counter feeblemind, if nothing else because they are both 5th level spells. Typically spells that counter other spells include language about being able to counteract spells of "equal level or lower" (like haste vs. slow). I see no reason why these two 5th level spells couldn't oppose each other.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Cheiromancer: My posts are more addressed to those saying that are saying that the list in Feeblemind is not descripted as a complete list, therefore they are assuming that there are other things allowed.

The other allowed things that people are arguing for are specifically those that are called out in other places in the rules. Nobody here is arguing for anything that isn't an interpretation of a written rule.

2) Break Enchantment will remove Feeblemind.
2) The Climb skill can be used to make attack rolls.

See, the second sentence is ridiculous because there's no reason to think that you could use your skill checks to make attack rolls. The first isn't, because there is a reason to think that Break Enchantment removes Feeblemind. It says in the spell description that it removes 5th level instantaneous enchantment effects, which describes Feeblemind.

Do you see the difference here?

 

[Artoomis]

Personally, I would line item veto that single line... seems to not fit with the spirit of the spell and creates more confusion than it should be.

Thank you for your time,
Wm. Holder

Wow. That's a huge change. Still, if that works for you, that's fine.

To me it does fit within the spirit of the spell, though the number on instananeous spells (that cause harmful effects making one a "victim" of the effects) that are available in the PHB to be reversed is very low.

In fact, there are exactly two: Unholy Blight and Feeblemind. The other four instantaneous spells (enhantment, transmutations or curses) are all helpful things (Reincarnate, Awaken, Mnemonic Enhancer and Break Enchantment).

Break Enchantment's intent seems to me to be:

All bad things that happen to you from enchantments, transmutations or curses (including items) can be reversed with Break Enchantment unless it is too powerfull, defined as:

1. It is an undispellable spell of sixth level or higher

and/or

2. It was cast with a caster level (CL) of 24 or lower (Max possible successful check is vs. DC35, set by 11 + CL).

 

[TheGogmagog]

I skipped some of this thread due to the back-and-forth nature of it, so I don't know if this point has already been made: but, I generally agree with the idea that BE should be able to counter feeblemind, if nothing else because they are both 5th level spells. Typically spells that counter other spells include language about being able to counteract spells of "equal level or lower" (like haste vs. slow). I see no reason why these two 5th level spells couldn't oppose each other.

I'll agree with this rule of thumb reasoning.

I also agree with the poster (can't see who from this page) who questioned what difference does it make? If it's players who are afflicted, why punish them if Break Encheantment is all they have? If It's NPC's the DM can provide whatever resources he wants for the NPC so this only seems to affect the fun of the players.

 

[thompgc]

Panacea from SC

The Panacea spell from the Spell Compendium (not sure what source it was in before that) specifically states that it cures Feeblemind (does lots of other stuff as well - beefier version of Cleanse that was posted towards the beginning of this thread)
It is a 4th level Cleric spell (and 5th level druid)

 

[sirwmholder]

Wow. That's a huge change. Still, if that works for you, that's fine.

To me it does fit within the spirit of the spell, though the number on instananeous spells (that cause harmful effects making one a "victim" of the effects) that are available in the PHB to be reversed is very low.

In fact, there are exactly two: Unholy Blight and Feeblemind. The other four instantaneous spells (enhantment, transmutations or curses) are all helpful things (Reincarnate, Awaken, Mnemonic Enhancer and Break Enchantment)...

Hardly a huge change... and you proved why that single line should be removed. It creates the ambiguity of seemingly to work for two spells that explicitly state how to remove the effects. Unholy Blight is a curse... you need to have Remove Curse cast to remove it... Feeblemind has a small list of spells that can remove the effect and Break Enchantment is no where on that list... in fact it takes a level 6 spell or higher to remove the effect. As the case with most D&D effects, a higher level spell is needed to negate a lower level effect.

Thank you for your time,
Wm. Holder

 

[Thanee]

Hardly a huge change... and you proved why that single line should be removed. It creates the ambiguity of seemingly to work for two spells that explicitly state how to remove the effects.

Yeah, though I have posted above, that there is hardly an ambiguity, since the complete spell description from the PHB (not from the SRD) explains what is meant there with two examples.

With 'instantaneous' they meant spells like Flesh to Stone (a 6th level instantaneous transmutation spell).

With 'cannot be dispelled' they meant something like Bestow Curse (a non-instantaneous spell, that specifically cannot be dispelled; the 5th-level limit only applies to spells, that specifically list such a restriction; instanteneous spells of *any* level can be countered by Break Enchanted, as long as they fit the general pattern of what can be affected, and there is no other rule, that prevents this, as in the case of Feeblemind, for example).

Bye
Thanee