Harmless Spells

[Matafuego]

Hello Everyone!

There's a question that makes me scratch my head every once in a while.

There are "harmless" spells. These are those spells that allow a Saving Throw but it says "(Harmless)" because they benefit (or don't damage) the objective.
My question is:
Does a character know he's being cast a "harmless" spell?
Does he feel it "in his skin"?
Or does he just have to trust the caster? (And if the caster says "believe in me, its a "Tongues" spell and instead casts a "Harm"" there would be no way to know and you'd have to decide wether you roll ST or not?)

Finally.
In case there is a "sixth sense trigger" warning the objective it's a harmless spell.
Could it be possible to investigate the idea of a spell that detects as "harmless" but isn't?
(kinda like a fake "Tongues" that instead deals damage or leaves you unable to speak)

And how about a whole campaing plot revolving around the idea of a wizard having researched that spell?
Or the "origin of magic" becomes wicked and no spell detects as harmless? or every spell detects as harmless?

Thank You for your thoughts on the matter.

Lucas

 

[Starglim]

It's a good thought, but there is no way to detect that a spell is harmless except that the caster said so and you trust him. If a character decides to resist a harmless spell then he certainly gets a saving throw.

 

[Zappo]

I'm afraid that the only thing you can do is make a Spellcraft roll if you want to know what magic is being cast at you.

However, I think that a character should be able to tell which type of saving throw he is facing. Fortitude, Will or ... well, I think Reflex effects tend to be pretty obvious. Noone knows how being exposed to magic would feel like or even exactly what a PC does to resist a spell, but I think that a Fortitude effect must feel very different from a Will effect.
If someone says that he's casting a cure wounds spell (Will save) on you and then you're asked for a Fortitude save, you can tell that there's something wrong.

 

[Staffan]

Thing is, there must be something special about harmless spells. If you cast a regular spell on someone who's unconscious, they get a save. If you cast a harmless spell, they don't. That tells me that there's a default level of resistance that lets you save against a harmful spell but not against a harmless one.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Right - against a non-harmless spell, a character can elect to give up his saving throw. Against a harmless spell, a character can elect to make a saving throw.

-Hyp.

 

[Zappo]

And this is curious because it means that any creature, even a mindless one, has the ability to tell whether it is being targeted by a spell and whether the spell is dangerous or not, regardless of whether it has knowledge of magic or even a brain.

 

[Staffan]

Not really, no. You can't elect to drop your defense against a harmful spell or raise your defense against a harmless spell, unless you are aware of the spell. That's the whole point we're arguing - there's a default defense level that treats harmful and harmless spells differently. Clearly, there's something special about harmless spells.

I would rule that a mindless target wouldn't really be aware of what's going on with the spellcasting, and thus would be unable to elect to raise/lower defenses. So they'd be stuck with the default level of resistance.

 

[ThirdWizard]

(harmless): The spell is usually beneficial, not harmful, but a targeted creature can attempt a saving throw if it desires.

So if someone casts inflict light wounds on me, my automatic defenses kick in. I can be unconcious, and I'll get a saving throw. I can elect to not take my saving throw instead, suffering full effects.

If someone casts cure light wounds on me, then it affects me. I can be unconcious and it will affect me with no saving throw. I can elect to save if I don't want to be affected by the cure light wounds.

You have no idea if the spell is beneficial, and you don't need to know, since it works the same way if you are unconcious and unable to forego your saving throw.

 

[lukelightning]

Maybe fantasy-game-immune-systems can sense the difference and kick in when there is harm being done to the body.l

 

[Henry]

House-rule type question:

What would be the repercussion to changing "harmless" to mean that a save against the spell is automatically successful if the player wishes?