Get pedantic on Feeblemind

[Cedric]

Several people have brought up Break Enchantment, instantaneous effects it would work on and Reincarnate.

So, here's a possible theorem.

I'm a human ranger with a favored enemy of orcs. I die and am reincarnated, I come back as an orc.

Upset by this, I seek a cleric who can cast True Resurrection. I then have my Sorcerer friend cast Break Enchantment on me to "undo" the Reincarnate.

I go back to being a dead guy at the foot of the cleric (and since Reincarnate was undone, my lost level is restored).

The cleric then True Resurrects me, and I come back as a human, precisely as I was when I died.

Would that even work? Sounds plausible, but almost worth of its own thread? Would my lost level actually be restored (it seems it would)? Would I keep any of the XP I gained in the time I spent as an Orc?

Weird...

 

[Artoomis]

...Until you cast a spell that restores missing limbs or fingers, your finger isn't growing back. Break Enchantment won't make your finger grow back.

Oddly enough, if it was a fifth level instantaneous transmutation spell, yes, it would. Wierd as that may be.

That's the way Break Enchament is written. It's very clear.

 

[Artoomis]

Several people have brought up Break Enchantment, instantaneous effects it would work on and Reincarnate.

So, here's a possible theorem.

I'm a human ranger with a favored enemy of orcs. I die and am reincarnated, I come back as an orc.

Upset by this, I seek a cleric who can cast True Resurrection. I then have my Sorcerer friend cast Break Enchantment on me to "undo" the Reincarnate.

I go back to being a dead guy at the foot of the cleric (and since Reincarnate was undone, my lost level is restored).

The cleric then True Resurrects me, and I come back as a human, precisely as I was when I died.

Would that even work? Sounds plausible, but almost worth of its own thread? Would my lost level actually be restored (it seems it would)? Would I keep any of the XP I gained in the time I spent as an Orc?

Weird...

With the way BE is written, this would work. In fact, from the Ranger's point of view, the Reincarnate might view himself as a "victim" of a curse.

It's bizarre, but works as written.

 

[Cedric]

Actually Imprisonment is kind of odd for an instaneous spell because it leaves you with a "permanent" effect.

If I get hit by a fireball, fail my save and take 34 hit points of damage. That is a permanent effect. You can't "dispel" my hp loss.

Now, thankfully there are mundane and magical rules for HEALING the damage. But otherwise, the effect is as permanent as if I had lost 34 hit points to an axe blow.

 

[Artoomis]

If I get hit by a fireball, fail my save and take 34 hit points of damage. That is a permanent effect. You can't "dispel" my hp loss.

Now, thankfully there are mundane and magical rules for HEALING the damage. But otherwise, the effect is as permanent as if I had lost 34 hit points to an axe blow.

No that's not a "permanent" effect in the sense of D&D magic. That's an instantaneous effect. Not the same thing.

 

[Cedric]

Oddly enough, if it was a fifth level instantaneous transmutation spell, yes, it would. Wierd as that may be.

That's the way Break Enchament is written. It's very clear.

Since (in my example) I added nothing to my pinky finger hacking spell to prevent Break Enchantment from working or described what could fix it...then I agree.

However, now let's say that when I write my spell, Cedric's Pinky Finger Hacker, I add the blurb, that the finger remains gone until a Regenerate spell is used...now Break Enchantment won't work.

It's clearly my intention that only a spell which could restore severed limbs would work. There is no need for me to list the multitude of spells that won't work (limited wish, heal, greater restoration, break enchantment, dispel magic, etc. etc. etc.).

 

[KarinsDad]

What a bizarre ruling. That's treating Feeblemind as it if created a permanent effect rather than an instaneous one. How odd.

It even says you cannot increase the scores to 1 if they are at 0. Bizarre.

I think someone was asleep at the switch to allow this ruling to go forward into the FAQ.

I think this FAQ ruling is based on the phrase:

The subject remains in this state until

The wording of the spell does make it sound like a permanent non-mutable effect. Ruling this way is perfectly reasonable because the creature is modified in such a way that stat boosting and draining magic does not affect those two ability scores.


However, the wording in Feeblemind on stat boosting items and spells is not explicitly called out. Nor is there a Feeblemind Condition in the game (like Stunned, Dazed, etc.). So personally, I probably would rule that since it is Instantaneous, stat boosting items can increase the Int and Cha.

Feeblemind might put the Int and Cha stats at 1, but it does not prevent death (lowering them to 0). So, should it prevent Ability Drain or Damage (lowering them to 0) or Ability Boost (raising them)? Not in my opinion.

If the effect was Permanent, then sure, I would not allow stat increasing magic to affect the target. But with it being Instantaneous, I have a hard time justifying such a ruling. Does Reincarnation prevent a creature from Polymorphing?


Another equally interesting question is: Does Feebleminded PCs get Experience? Experience is based on learning. If ones Int is one, can he truly learn anything significant?

 

[Cedric]

No that's not a "permanent" effect in the sense of D&D magic. That's an instantaneous effect. Not the same thing.

The consequences of an instantaneous effect are typically permanent.

 

[Cedric]

However, the wording in Feeblemind on stat boosting items and spells is not explicitly called out. Nor is there a Feeblemind Condition in the game (like Stunned, Dazed, etc.). So personally, I probably would rule that since it is Instantaneous, stat boosting items can increase the Int and Cha.

See, I disagree, but I think this may just come down to how we view the spell.

I view it as something that instantaneously damages the brain in a manner which almost completely disables the subjects. The neural pathways that allow cognitive thought, speech, memory, spellcasting...those are all gone.

A headband of intellect won't work because the parts of the brain it would boost are damaged beyond the ability to be usable.

Now mind you, that's just the way I see the spell working. I can see other points of view on this aspect of it.

 

[Artoomis]

The consequences of an instantaneous effect are typically permanent.

But not in the sense of "magically" permanent. In sense of "you took damage" permanent.

In other words, permanent vs, temporary as opposed to permanent vs. instantaneous.

Oddly enough, permanent effects typically last until dispelled (that's not really all that permanent, is it?).

An instanenous effect is not typically dispellable, but often fixable (healing, etc.).