Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Greenfield" data-source="post: 6310019" data-attributes="member: 6669384">The Discern Location spell has been called overpowered.&nbsp; It's also been called useless.&nbsp; Depends on the game and the DM I suppose.To cast it, you need to have seen the person or object that you're trying to locate, *OR* have something that the target once owned.In our game world, which is based on the latter years of the Roman Empire, slavery is a simple fact of life and nobody thinks it's &quot;wrong&quot;.&nbsp; (except a few PCs who somehow have a modern morality in an ancient world.)So the question might be, what if we have a slave of the person we're looking for?&nbsp; Does that qualify?Alternately, what if we have some money that slave spent, money that came from the master and was therefore something the master/target of the spell, once owned.Technically either one should work.&nbsp; A lot of DMs don't like &quot;Technically&quot;.Speaking in game metaphysics, the slave's personal aura might overwhelm the master's.&nbsp; The coin, being one of many, of no personal interest, and having been owned by so many, might not have enough of their personal signature/aura to be distinguished.Speaking as I might as a DM, I could argue that &quot;once owned&quot; implies a personal possession, rather than items that casually pass hand to hand.&nbsp; As for the slave, I could argue that &quot;something owned&quot; implies a &quot;thing&quot;, which a person isn't.What's your take?&nbsp; Feel free to address any or all of these aspects.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Greenfield, post: 6310019, member: 6669384"] The [I]Discern Location[/I] spell has been called overpowered. It's also been called useless. Depends on the game and the DM I suppose. To cast it, you need to have seen the person or object that you're trying to locate, *OR* have something that the target once owned. In our game world, which is based on the latter years of the Roman Empire, slavery is a simple fact of life and nobody thinks it's "wrong". (except a few PCs who somehow have a modern morality in an ancient world.) So the question might be, what if we have a slave of the person we're looking for? Does that qualify? Alternately, what if we have some money that slave spent, money that came from the master and was therefore something the master/target of the spell, once owned. Technically either one should work. A lot of DMs don't like "Technically". Speaking in game metaphysics, the slave's personal aura might overwhelm the master's. The coin, being one of many, of no personal interest, and having been owned by so many, might not have enough of their personal signature/aura to be distinguished. Speaking as I might as a DM, I could argue that "once owned" implies a personal possession, rather than items that casually pass hand to hand. As for the slave, I could argue that "something owned" implies a "thing", which a person isn't. What's your take? Feel free to address any or all of these aspects. [/QUOTE]

Verification