Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nifft" data-source="post: 3869762" data-attributes="member: 6562">If you prohibit even &quot;help my buddies&quot; actions, you're requiring that the character be a burden to the party. The nonviolent thing already imposes enough limits on his actions, IMHO.Your logic sounds like it could also be extended to de-buff spells: &quot;Let me slow you so my buddies can chop you up more easily.&quot;So the dude can't attack directly, can't buff his allies, and (if I'm reading you correctly) can't hinder his foes. What does he have left to do?- - -I'd prohibit spells that cause lethal damage, even if it's indirectly. The monster summoning spells would be out (vs. living foes) unless you can communicate with the critter and make it do non-lethal damage (or make it just block, trip, cast nonlethal spells, or whatever). I'd do the same for the dominate spells -- IMHO you can't dominate someone into doing an action you couldn't do yourself.Cheers, -- N</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nifft, post: 3869762, member: 6562"] If you prohibit even "help my buddies" actions, you're requiring that the character be a burden to the party. The nonviolent thing already imposes enough limits on his actions, IMHO. Your logic sounds like it could also be extended to de-buff spells: "Let me [i]slow[/i] you so my buddies can chop you up more easily." So the dude can't attack directly, can't buff his allies, and (if I'm reading you correctly) can't hinder his foes. What does he have left to do? - - - I'd prohibit spells that cause lethal damage, even if it's indirectly. The monster summoning spells would be out (vs. living foes) [u]unless[/u] you can communicate with the critter and make it do non-lethal damage (or make it just block, trip, cast nonlethal spells, or whatever). I'd do the same for the [i]dominate[/i] spells -- IMHO you can't [i]dominate[/i] someone into doing an action you couldn't do yourself. Cheers, -- N [/QUOTE]

Verification