Sleep, Circle of Death, and related spells.

[Wulf Ratbane]

If the PC were supposed to be able to pick and choose specific creatures, it wouldn't be an area-effect spell, it would say X targets up to Y hit dice total.

That's exactly right. (Compare it to Banishment.)

 

[BryonD]

That's exactly right. (Compare it to Banishment.)

I don't think so. The difference is, there is no picking and choosing of targets. The spell specifies the targets. It just has more than one restriction on the targets.

I agree that it is more powerful. I also agree it is not a big deal either way.
I'm not convinced there is proof either way, so I'll stay with what simply makes sense. And to me it does not make sense that the 9th orc out gets hit by a bit of magic energy, and fails his save and yet does not sleep because of a schrodinger's cat effect.

I don't see the bits of magic energy hitting an orc, deciding if the orc slept or not and then moving on to the next orc if no.

I also don't see "affected" as meaning put to sleep. I see "affected" as meaning: forced to respond to the spell, in this case forced to make a save to avoid sleep.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

One of us is obfuscating our meaning.

Just so it's clear, I have been playing option B but now I think I've been doing it wrong, for the reasons I laid out upthread.

What's your position, A or B?

EDIT: Man, I really wish I could get a couple hundred votes on this poll.

 

[BryonD]

My answer is B.

I think that is the "right" answer based on taking RAW as far as it clearly goes and then applying reason from there.

I don't think it is broken to go with A.
I don't think it is stupid to go with A.
If Skip Williams came along and said A was intended from day 1, I'd say, "Oh. OK."

But I think B is the more righterest answer.

(B modified that the caster doesn't really designate targets beyond through the placement of the (maximum) area of effect relative to himself.)

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

It's B.

I used to think that.

Sums me up. Myself and every group I've been in has gone with B without really thinking about it, and as a result, those HD limit area spells always seemed weak and not worth learning. Now I think I'm going to go with A and at least playtest it as the rule, if not outright declare it so. For the poll I'll vote B, though, since up to now I've done it that way.

 

[Tilenas]

If the PC were supposed to be able to pick and choose specific creatures, it wouldn't be an area-effect spell, it would say X targets up to Y hit dice total.

While this assertion is indeed correct, it does not help finding the answer to the problem, as neiter A nor B implies that the caster may choose the target(s).

I think one major problem lies in the way the spell descriptions are worded. Some descriptions (hypnotic pattern, for one) seem to suggest that a successful saving throw is a rare exception and thus use terms like affected rather lightly:

"Roll 2d4 and add your caster level (maximum 10) to determine the total number of Hit Dice of creatures affected."
Then: "Affected creatures become fascinated by the pattern of colors."

It is written in a neutral way, as if a saving throw didn't exist because it implies that the targets you choose suffer the ill effect of the spell automatically. Maybe the spell didn't allow a save when the text was written, who knows?
I think that stance is a burden carried over from previous editions, where a saving throw was viewed as the ability to occationally weasel out of a situation, not a proper defense anyone could employ regularly (see 4th edition).

[EDIT: of couse, you don't get to choose any targets with hypnotic pattern. guess i took my choice of words rather lightly as well ]

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I wonder if there's any correlation between the edition you learned to play, and your interpretation of this spell? Looking at the text of the spells now, I can see how B) is a possible interpretation, but it never occurred to me to even think of that as the way it should play. That may be due to my rules interpretations carrying over from 2E - I played 2E every other week from '89-00, so I was very ingrained in that mindset, and I've found that I've carried over the intent in prior editions into my view of 3rd edition.

 

[BryonD]

I played first and second edition and didn't see it that way at all.
Of course, I did drop 2E pretty early on (unaware of being in the first stage of the inverse Star Trek rule). So perhaps I didn't get conditioned.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I played 1e and 2e also. I have no idea how I got conditioned to accept B.

 

[GlassJaw]

I also don't see "affected" as meaning put to sleep. I see "affected" as meaning: forced to respond to the spell, in this case forced to make a save to avoid sleep.

This is my "definition" of "affected" as well. Thus, I chose B.