tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5621016516937695074.post3386012744824153015..comments2024-03-16T06:00:04.833-04:00Comments on Sham's Grog 'n Blog: D&D Cover to Cover, part 14Sham aka Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14329116400656617173noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5621016516937695074.post-16440663421891669032008-11-25T14:52:00.000-05:002008-11-25T14:52:00.000-05:00I treat Charm Person as if the victim rolled a 12 ...<I>I treat Charm Person as if the victim rolled a 12 on the Reaction Table, and then an 18 for morale. You now have the person on your side; it's up to you to keep him there.</I><BR/><BR/>John: Excellent way to handle Charm Person. I like your take on it.Sham aka Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14329116400656617173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5621016516937695074.post-35195898344245582182008-11-25T12:55:00.000-05:002008-11-25T12:55:00.000-05:00I treat Charm Person as if the victim rolled a 12 ...I treat Charm Person as if the victim rolled a 12 on the Reaction Table, and then an 18 for morale. You now have the person on your side; it's up to you to keep him there.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08362851153913826825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5621016516937695074.post-91313616453987136662008-11-24T19:49:00.000-05:002008-11-24T19:49:00.000-05:00belst8: I agree in regard to Charm Person. In fact...belst8: I agree in regard to Charm Person. In fact, 'completely under the influence' is a misleading choice of words. There's a clue from an upcoming M-U spell that perhaps even at the time of this writing, Charm Person was not meant to give the caster a 'puppet' victim.<BR/><BR/>I also agree whole heartedly with the sentiment:<BR/><BR/><I>the result will be to make magic mechanical rather than the strange and wonderful, or even disturbing, thing that it could be. And what a loss that is.</I><BR/><BR/>Good stuff, belst8.Sham aka Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14329116400656617173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5621016516937695074.post-45114659757680062432008-11-24T10:50:00.000-05:002008-11-24T10:50:00.000-05:00The text of charm person certainly reads as you in...The text of charm person certainly reads as you interpret it. But I speculate that it may have undergone a change in play, when Gygax found it to be too powerful. My evidence for this hypothesis is the inclusion in Supplement I of the third level spell suggestion, which, as described, is LESS powerful than charm person. Admittedly, it can have a delayed effect, which is neat, but it is limited to a single, simply worded command. If charm person makes someone your puppet, it's ten times more powerful than this. <BR/><BR/>(In fact, the original charm person might even encompass the delayed effect: after all, you could make someone your puppet and then tell him to do something much later.)belst8https://www.blogger.com/profile/05896444893911828265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5621016516937695074.post-8203953023644438882008-11-24T10:43:00.000-05:002008-11-24T10:43:00.000-05:00In AD&D magic always seemed to me like a sort ...In AD&D magic always seemed to me like a sort of weird technology, and certainly a known quantity. I found this uninspiring and even vaguely depressing.<BR/><BR/>But I LOVE the original list of spells from Men and Magic. There's something about how generic and elemental they are. It's as if the wizard masters basic mystical forces: the ability to influence other's minds (sleep, charm person, suggestion), to see things with an occult eye (detect magic, evil, invisibility), to change his form or the form of others (the polymophs), etc. <BR/><BR/>I understand the natural impulse to proliferate spells and to fine tune and specialize them. But unless it's done with care, I think the result will be to make magic mechanical rather than the strange and wonderful, or even disturbing, thing that it could be. And what a loss that is.belst8https://www.blogger.com/profile/05896444893911828265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5621016516937695074.post-81879068090576179562008-11-24T10:40:00.000-05:002008-11-24T10:40:00.000-05:00I can't argue with the fact that the Sleep spe...I can't argue with the fact that the Sleep spell is very powerful. Just based on the wording I am left to believe that there is no save...but, and I touched on this briefly in the notes, what 'sleep' actually does determines how powerful it truly is.<BR/><BR/>The spell does not render targets unconscious, it simply makes them fall asleep. It does not say that this magic sleep is akin to being comatose. There might be a chance for targets to wake up from noise, light, being touched, etc. If even a few of the foes are not affected, they might be able to rouse their allies in the next round.<BR/><BR/>That said, I play Sleep how I assume most D&D players do, though. That those affected are knocked out for long enough that the player characters can tie them up or cut their throats. <BR/><BR/>And you're right, played this way, especially with no save, Sleep might be more appropriate as a 3rd or 4th level spell, imo.Sham aka Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14329116400656617173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5621016516937695074.post-79738861239038518922008-11-24T09:30:00.000-05:002008-11-24T09:30:00.000-05:00Based on the above text we can see that there is N...<EM>Based on the above text we can see that there is NO Saving Throw against Sleep.</EM><BR/><BR/>I've interpreted this one differently. In my games, I've ruled that Sleep triggers a saving throw - it's a spell, there are saving throws vs. spell, ergo one gets a saving throw. This matter was unclear enough that Greyhawk needed a clarification in the direction you interpret it - no saving throw. This carried over into subsequent TSR editions. I really think a Sleep with no saving throw would need to be a higher level spell, and there was actually some commentary on its relatively high power level in the early issues of Alarums & Excursions.Wayne Rossihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11347401495298367324noreply@blogger.com