Permanency?

[Ogrork the Mighty]

If a character dies, he becomes an object (?). Does this mean spells that cannot be cast on objects cease to function? Do all spells cease to function when the caster dies?

I've checked the PH and couldn't find anything.

 

[Pax]

Spells which originated from a caster whohappens to die, do not automatically end. If they required concentration to maintain, well ... obviously, your average fellow who begins approaching room temperature isn't going to be very able to maintain concentration, nwo, is he?

OTOH, spells which were cast upon him probably SHOULD end, but if the GM wants to consider them merely suppressed (so that they come back into effect if they get whacked with an ability that brings 'em back to life - or unlife), there's nothing broken about that, IMO.

 

[Liquidsabre]

I've checked the PH and couldn't find anything.

Try looking under the individual spells. If they say target creature, then yes, the spells end when the "target creature" becomes an "object", and thus an illegal target for the spell. As for "personal" spells (meaning "you", the caster) I imagine also end as "you" no longer exists, being dead and all.

As I said, reference individual spells and the magic chapter under Aiming Spells for more.

 

[DragonShadow]

From my own DM standpoint, any spell that was cast on you while living and made permanent would stay in place, since it is permanent.

It won't be legal for the same spells to be recast upon you, since the target type changed, but the spells were cast and set in place when they were legal.

Since you don't concentrate on permanent spells on yourself, as they're just lingering around you, they wouldn't go with ya to the big gaming table in the sky (or paper shredder, for a PC ~.^).

 

[Oscar carramiñana]

Agree with Dragon Shadow said before
I think your spells still on your body waiting you return

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

But what about this scenario: You know you are going to die (say in an upcoming battle). So you cast a whole bunch of permanency spells b/c when you get raised you're just going to lose that XP anyways. But you'll still have the permanency in effect if you allow it to continue to effect an object rather than a person. Permanency isn't really permanent anyways, since dispel magic can get rid of it.

That's why I tend to agree that permanency should end if you die (presuming the spell doesn't effect objects).

Furthermore, I just noticed something else of interest. You can only cast invisibility on an object when making it permanent. So, if the spell stays in effect even after death, you could cast invisibility on a corpse and make it permanent before raising the creature, which would then be permanently invisible. Broken? I think so.

The permanency spell distinguishes between what spells can be cast on "yourself" and what can be cast on others or objects. Under the returning the dead to life section of the PH, it states that upon death a character's soul leaves his/her body and travels to the astral plane and then to the plane of their deity. To me, that would suggest that the corpse is no longer the "self" and justifies the official ruling that a corpse has become an object. Ergo, any permanent spell effects that do not effect objects end.

I realize this creates a little consternation on the part of spellcasters who have gone to the trouble of burning xp for permanency, but death should be feared regardless. It also prevents characters from burning XP today, knowing that they will have the opportunity to earn it back should they ever die.

 

[DragonShadow]

But what about this scenario: You know you are going to die (say in an upcoming battle). So you cast a whole bunch of permanency spells b/c when you get raised you're just going to lose that XP anyways. But you'll still have the permanency in effect if you allow it to continue to effect an object rather than a person. Permanency isn't really permanent anyways, since dispel magic can get rid of it.

That's why I tend to agree that permanency should end if you die (presuming the spell doesn't effect objects).

Furthermore, I just noticed something else of interest. You can only cast invisibility on an object when making it permanent. So, if the spell stays in effect even after death, you could cast invisibility on a corpse and make it permanent before raising the creature, which would then be permanently invisible. Broken? I think so.

The permanency spell distinguishes between what spells can be cast on "yourself" and what can be cast on others or objects. Under the returning the dead to life section of the PH, it states that upon death a character's soul leaves his/her body and travels to the astral plane and then to the plane of their deity. To me, that would suggest that the corpse is no longer the "self" and justifies the official ruling that a corpse has become an object. Ergo, any permanent spell effects that do not effect objects end.

I realize this creates a little consternation on the part of spellcasters who have gone to the trouble of burning xp for permanency, but death should be feared regardless. It also prevents characters from burning XP today, knowing that they will have the opportunity to earn it back should they ever die.

It may be broken, but loopholes such as that happen all the time and allow people to do things they normally wouldn't be able to do.

And just because magic can be dispeled with dispel magic, doesn't mean that it would be. In my mind, if it hasn't been gotten rid of, it shouldn't just leave. It's kind of like a construct following the final orders of its creator even after its creators death. (And they do this, as we all know.)

If you know that you're going to die, or be killed, and prepare for it by casting a junkload of permanency spells on yourself, more power to you. Exactly how you knew is the trick.


It might be iffy, but hey...it's on you whether you want to allow something "broken" or not. Just last night I allowed the PC's to Baleful Polymorph a Griffon into an Eagle, Awaken it, and then BP it back into a Griffon. It's shady, but, it's not that big of a deal.

 

[Scion]

Why not just use polymorph instead and not risk destroying the griffons mind?

That also gives them the type.

Much like the crazy druid, with a certain domain, who turns into an animal, casts a maximised awaken, rinse repeat until out of exp to use. Wild and crazy! Hundreds of HD! lol

As for the permanency though, I would allow it to stay. Although, I tend to groan if anyone actually casts it. For the sheer cost of it, it should be much better than it currently is.

 

[DragonShadow]

Why not just use polymorph instead and not risk destroying the griffons mind?

They just wanted to Awaken the Griffon, and it worked with no problems, really. So, it's all gravy.

Besides, they stole the Griffon from a Hobgoblin who was using it as a mount, and the wizard in the party had just fireballed everything into oblivion. The Griffon was just barely alive.

-_- I worked really hard on the NPC/Anti-party, and they decided that rather than talking to them and having a plot, they would smite them into the ground where they stood.

I'm starting to wonder if the NPC's are evil, or if they are.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Your construct example isn't what I'm talking about. The permanency was cast on the construct, not the spellcaster. I'm talking about spells cast on the spellcaster that were made permanent.

I haven't seen a counter to my reasoning yet. What do the rules say (if they do at all) about creatures changing into objects while a spell is still in effect?