Author Topic: The end of all "AntiMage" threads  (Read 83597 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

dark_samuari

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1024
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #300 on: March 25, 2010, 03:31:59 AM »


That's sort of what this thread feels like to me.

P.S. Post 300!!!

jseah

  • Domesticated Capuchin Monkey
  • **
  • Posts: 87
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #301 on: March 25, 2010, 10:32:05 AM »
He'll suffer the curse yes, in the safety of his own demiplane.  The entire operation is carried out by his own simulacrums / Ice Assassins / Mind Raped creatures. Which may well be as powerful as him.  And he can have more of them than you have people. 
Thats the cool part of it.

The mind raped creatures are allies thus turn on the wizard and try to kill him (or at least escape). It's a bad day when all your followers, cohorts, lovers, and pets turn on you and you cannot see or hear them creeping up for revenge or boredom.
Not if they're slaves.  Then they have no choice, and are most definitely hostile (but unable to act on it) and thus not friends/allies. 

Simulacrum: No special telepathic link exists, so command must be exercised in some other manner., the wizard is blind/deaf and has 1 int/wis. Does he even remember how to find his simulacrum, further self simulacrum's are half level and thus no shapechange/celerity or even planesshift for that matter. An easy fight for a 20th level character as gear worn alone is enough to win. Simulacrum of 40hd creatures are more problematic and you kinda have to relive on the poor flinging wizard to forget.
The simulacrums command themselves.  You can simply tell them to listen to each other's commands and have them follow a meeting schedule.  They have an int score IIRC. 

Ice Assassins depend on who but are also irrelevant at the same time. Long ago another wizard, member of the Power Stoppers created an Ice Assassin designed to kill all other Ice Assassins before they are created and they used Pun-Pun's toe nail. It takes one caster in the history of all time to do this and it screws over everyone for all times.
DM fiat.  Which might reasonably be pulled in the form of divine intervention if you clone a god.  Not quite so much if you clone yourself.  And order it to obey your committee. 

Really, no wizard gains this much power as the club of Power Stoppers would have responded long, long ago so theres that to consider. They are like the assassins in that movie with Angelina Jolie, only at least half the members are allowing to see the source and no one can tweak it in their favor. PS is a non DM solution for everything and would make for a possible campaign hook as they could be hiring out adventurers to distract wizards.
Said club of power stoppers IS the target wizard.  Since if there's no one else who can achieve said power, then said Power Stopper wizard is the default only one around who does anything. 

*******************************

Point taken about Love's Pain -> mind affecting.  Is it possible to use the dying curse for a "right back at you" revenge?  And the wizard will have a larger army to do it with.  Since he isn't limited by leadership. 


Hijax

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 646
  • Kobolds ate my cookies
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #303 on: March 25, 2010, 02:30:56 PM »
dark_samuari, ironically, didn't Doc Strange _lose_?

(although, I would say it's due to DM Fiat, or rather plot contrivancy.)

Well, the hulk IS pretty DM fiat driven, since his power is directly linked to his anger(IE limitless).


Most climatic battles with the hulk goes a lot like this:

Enemy beats Hulk up good
Hulk goes angry at being beaten up
HULK SMASH ENEMY
"There's more to apocalypse than running around like a maniac you know"
-B. M. Evilwizardington.
blogging at disasters made in china

Tonymitsu

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #304 on: March 25, 2010, 02:41:07 PM »
Didn't the Beyonder once tell Dr. Strange that there was no upper limit to the Hulk's strength for that reason?


Anyway...
If you need more proof that a spell needs to specify in order to exclude clauses inherent within the original description then look at how love's pain specifies that the secondary target doesn't get a save or SR, something which the spell allows in the description.

Actually, the spell description doesn't allow a saving throw to the "primary" target (just SR).  The existence of a "primary" target or a "secondary" target would indicate a primary/secondary effect.  Which, explicitly, there is none.  There is only "subject" and "subject's dearest loved one" suffering for what you are doing to the subject, NOT, to him.

As to why they'd need to make such a note regarding the subject's "loved one"? I'd say to make sure you don't somehow misunderstand what's happening here.

Now might be an idea to find something else to use a basis for that argument.

Quote from: Azrael
NERD RAGE!!!

Um, woah.
I'm sorry.  Excuse me.


But... where exactly did you read that all spell effects and descriptors explicitly carry over to secondary whatnot?

Cause the player's handbook sure doesn't have a line like that when it talks about spell descriptions.  Just how they interact with other spells and abilities.
In fact the only time they talk about secondary effects is with poisons.
Rules Compendium has an extra line, in that mind-affecting effects only work on creatures with intelligence 1 or higher.

So is this hard and fast claim of yours actually supported by something? 

Cause, I mean... it seems like you're making up a bunch of BS right now because you hate to see people talk about abusing broken stuff in D&D.
Sure it makes sense, but it also makes sense to me that Mind Blank blocks detection from the Mindsight feat.  Why?  Well because Telepathy is mind-affecting obviously (the whole ability is based on detect thoughts).  Lo and behold, in MM1, Telepathy in fact lacks the mind-affecting descriptor.
I mean shit, I still bitch when I see people say that a Hellbreaker is the only way to avoid Mindsight and ask how, and then argue that Mind Blank should work for exactly the same reason and get, "No it don't."

I mean if you want to argue it then, fine, go ahead, but at least cite some precedent (like other spells that offer a primary/secondary target in their descriptions that support your claim) other than "Duh!!!  It's SOOO OBVIOUS!!!"

Like this:

If they bothered to take the time to spell out that this spell doesn't work if the loved one is an antimagic field, don't you think they would have taken the extra 9 or so character inches to mention "or immune to mind-affecting" also?  If they are going to list conditions which are acceptable to stop the field wouldn't they bother to point out something that obvious?
So it's easy enough to conclude that it doesn't matter if you are immune to mind-affecting or not.  Just that your target, y'know the subject of the spell, isn't.

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #305 on: March 25, 2010, 04:37:14 PM »
1. I AM SO FUCKING SICK OF THIS GOD DAMNED ARGUMENT!
2. ANYTHING that the spell accomplishes (direct damage or otherwise) will ADDITIONALLY carry the mind affecting descriptor!
3. However, it does not state this.
4. The damage isn't coming from nowhere, the SPELL is causing the damage, thus, the damage is mind affecting.
1. I am sick of others but go ahead argue against their refusal to accept the books in front of them tomorrow. It makes the forums more active that way.

2A. An Searing Arcane Fusion doesn't increase the damage the Fireball spell cast though it does.
2B. A Blistering Anyspell doesn't help the prepared fireball bypass resistance.
2C. A Snowcast Energy Substituted(fire) Bite of the Wearbear don't change you're claw damage to be fire based.

3. Yeah and the rules does not state Rogues can take epic feats and the RoTD/Draconomicon/MM does not state kobolds are dragons. People still argue otherwise. See 1, becuase if it's not ego fueling them it's boredom.

4. Oh yes, spells always do damage inherited their descriptors. You know, like how I can cast a spell with the [Electricity] [Cold] descriptors and it deals Electricity & Sonic damage. You're 100% accurate!
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #306 on: March 25, 2010, 04:42:47 PM »
That's a false analogy and you know it.
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #307 on: March 25, 2010, 04:47:59 PM »
Which one? Lack of pointing it out there.
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

Azrael

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 434
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #308 on: March 25, 2010, 05:05:28 PM »
But... where exactly did you read that all spell effects and descriptors explicitly carry over to secondary whatnot?

And where did you read that they don't!?

You're obviously incapable of seeing the illogical argument you are presenting to me. I accept the RAW, I live by it. Until you can find a clause that says something about secondary effects of spells not being subject to the rules of the spell then stfu

I mean really, that's what you are trying to argue. I don't have to find anything that says all spell effects and descriptors carry over ITS APPARENT!!! Why shouldn't that be the automatic interpretation of the rules. What you are saying is that they don't carry over...and you cant even give me a good reason why...It carries over unless it specifically says it does not, just like EVERYTHING else in the rules! You are trying to make a specific case here and not even cite a good example while I am merely taking 99.9% of all the material out there and applying the same mechanics. Therefore, I don't have to cite any examples, but you do.

Don't make it seem like I'm ignorant of this debate, I have been at it much longer than you have and I am well aware of what love's pain does (I do have all the books).

If they bothered to take the time to spell out that this spell doesn't work if the loved one is an antimagic field, don't you think they would have taken the extra 9 or so character inches to mention "or immune to mind-affecting" also?  If they are going to list conditions which are acceptable to stop the field wouldn't they bother to point out something that obvious?
So it's easy enough to conclude that it doesn't matter if you are immune to mind-affecting or not.  Just that your target, y'know the subject of the spell, isn't.

Oh lord...why should they have to? Does every spell that has the mind affecting descriptor mention it? No, I believe (and this is just my opinion) that they felt it was necessary to mention anti-magic fields because of the clause stating it doesn't get a save or SR. Perhaps they felt like some would make an issue about anti-magic fields, so they took care of it preemptively.


That's a false analogy and you know it.

And I don't even acknowledge what he said because of it. I hope he was being sarcastic in an attempt to have me debate it (along with his feeble attempts to poke fun at my grammar...unless of course it wasn't, and he needs to work on his own  :lmao), because otherwise he doesn't deserve to ever speak to me of logic again.



And for the record, I wasn't "raging" I was exclaiming...If I was actually "raging" do you really think I would have had the sense to make the napoleon dynamite joke? This is why I hate things like this, there's no way to convey sarcasm, or proper emotion.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 05:14:13 PM by Azrael »

jseah

  • Domesticated Capuchin Monkey
  • **
  • Posts: 87
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #309 on: March 25, 2010, 06:18:44 PM »
Actually, upon reading Love's Pain and the d20srd.org bit on Spell Descriptions, I have to agree with SorO_Lost. 
The Descriptor portion is most likely only applying to the target as defined as part of the Target line. 

Take the example of Telekinesis.  I have Snowcasting.  I cast telekinesis (now with the [Cold] descriptor) on a sword and throw it at an enemy. 
If the enemy is immune to [Cold] spells, he is not immune to this effect of a [Cold] TK, which is a sword sticking out of his face.  He IS immune if I try to throw him at a sword instead of the other way around. 

To claim otherwise is to say that being immune to magical fire effects is to be immune to the (completely mundane) fire that results from a fireball igniting a forest because that forest fire is demonstrably an effect of the fireball.  Nevertheless, that forest fire is not magical fire despite being the direct result of a fireball. 


In a more related example, right next to Love's Pain is the much abused Mind Rape.  This is also [Evil, Mind Affecting]. 
In particular, it states that the caster gains knowledge of the target's memories, emotions and so on.  This effect (of gaining knowledge) should work even if the caster has Mind Blank active, which your argument would prevent. 

If I interpreted your opinion wrongly, do please correct me. 
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 06:20:29 PM by jseah »

dark_samuari

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1024
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #310 on: March 25, 2010, 06:38:45 PM »
dark_samuari, ironically, didn't Doc Strange _lose_?

(although, I would say it's due to DM Fiat, or rather plot contrivancy.)

Well to be completely fair the Hulk performed an attack that actually isn't spelled out in DnD. The Hulk disabled Dr. Strange more than anything by snapping his hands.

So in this case it is DM Fiat but it's also a really smart move on the Hulk taking out the one weakness of the doctor.

PhaedrusXY

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8022
  • Advanced Spambot
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #311 on: March 25, 2010, 06:41:42 PM »
dark_samuari, ironically, didn't Doc Strange _lose_?

(although, I would say it's due to DM Fiat, or rather plot contrivancy.)

Well to be completely fair the Hulk performed an attack that actually isn't spelled out in DnD. The Hulk disabled Dr. Strange more than anything by snapping his hands.

So in this case it is DM Fiat but it's also a really smart move on the Hulk taking out the one weakness of the doctor.

The hulk always wins because his comics are stupid as hell. Holy crap I hate the hulk. Of course, that was my little brother's and one of my friend's favorite comic book characters, mostly because of how stupid it was. HULK SMASH! Pretty much summed up their mentality. I never even got into comic books (I think I've owned maybe 2 in my whole lifetime), but still managed to hear enough about that one to thoroughly hate it.

The old TV show was actually pretty awesome, though. Lot's of emotional turmoil. :D
[spoiler]
A couple of water benders, a dike, a flaming arrow, and a few barrels of blasting jelly?

Sounds like the makings of a gay porn film.
...thanks
[/spoiler]

Anklebite

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2009
  • I shall play you the song of my people.
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #312 on: March 25, 2010, 07:01:18 PM »
I have a few copies of she-hulk. much more entertaining.
I do not suffer from paranoia; I enjoy every second of it.
Pioneer of the Ultimate Magus + Sublime Chord + Ultimate Magus combo

dark_samuari

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1024
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #313 on: March 25, 2010, 07:02:06 PM »
dark_samuari, ironically, didn't Doc Strange _lose_?

(although, I would say it's due to DM Fiat, or rather plot contrivancy.)

Well to be completely fair the Hulk performed an attack that actually isn't spelled out in DnD. The Hulk disabled Dr. Strange more than anything by snapping his hands.

So in this case it is DM Fiat but it's also a really smart move on the Hulk taking out the one weakness of the doctor.

The hulk always wins because his comics are stupid as hell. Holy crap I hate the hulk. Of course, that was my little brother's and one of my friend's favorite comic book characters, mostly because of how stupid it was. HULK SMASH! Pretty much summed up their mentality. I never even got into comic books (I think I've owned maybe 2 in my whole lifetime), but still managed to hear enough about that one to thoroughly hate it.

The old TV show was actually pretty awesome, though. Lot's of emotional turmoil. :D

You should invest in Planet Hulk and the sequel (which the battle between Dr. Strange and Hulk, including numerous others, is shown) World War Hulk. WWH isn't as great as Planet Hulk, which is amazing in it's scope, storytelling and making you actually care about the Hulk as a person.

I'd say definitely try to pick up Planet Hulk PhaedrusXY, you won't regret it.


bearsarebrown

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #315 on: March 25, 2010, 07:21:47 PM »
WWH is ridiculously intense. It's not the best story but holy hell I was excited at the climax.

dark_samuari

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1024
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #316 on: March 25, 2010, 07:34:36 PM »
My favorite part of Planet Hulk is when they delve into how the Hulk truly hates Banner but is also legitimately terrified of him because he knows any chance Banner has of killing himself he'll take it. It's why the Hulk won't let him fly spacecrafts because he knows Banner will pilot it right into the sun if given the chance.

Makes for a great inner-conflict.

Ikeren

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 224
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #317 on: March 25, 2010, 07:54:15 PM »
Quote
holy hell I was excited at the climax.

I think this should be quoted out of context :p

Bozwevial

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4497
  • Developing a relaxed attitude to danger.
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #318 on: March 25, 2010, 10:31:13 PM »
Just a quick question here, Azrael, but by your reasoning, doesn't that mean that a character with Mind Blank active isn't able to receive information from, say, Detect Thoughts, regardless of whether his target is immune or not, since Mind Blank protects against all mind-affecting spells?

Azrael

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 434
    • Email
Re: The end of all "AntiMage" threads
« Reply #319 on: March 26, 2010, 01:32:37 AM »
Some would argue that you can ignore it for your own spell's effects. But...yeah, I thought that was already accepted by RAW...I went over that clause a long time ago with one of my players, but I let her ignore it since it was her own spell.