3.5E Mindless Rage

[Harold Groot]

My character has been working on her "Captain Drawfire" role and has
just come across MINDLESS RAGE. This appears to have tremendous
possibilities.

Normally she has OVERLAND FLIGHT up, so it would appear when outdoors
that she can cast MINDLESS RAGE on some big tough fighter types (with
poor Will saves) and then just fly around having them chase her.
There is nothing in the spell description that says they can give up
the chase if getting to her is impossible. They also can't use ranged
attacks or spells against her, or attack anyone else. So it would
seem possible to just fly back and forth, making the enemy do nothing
but chase her. If she can get several enemies to fail Will saves she
can essentially take them out of the fight.

I'm wondering if she can lead her victims right past her teammates
(giving them Attacks Of Opportunity). While the spell requires the
victim to get as close as possible (and attack if possible), the spell
description mentions that the victim "is by no means rendered idiotic
or suicidal" and gives the example that a victim "won't charge off a
cliff in an attempt to reach you". It's true that provoking an AoO
would not be certain death, but I think that needlessly allowing an
AoO could be considered "idotic". I'm thinking that MINDLESS RAGE
would allow either use of the Tumble skill to avoid AoOs or allow a
detour around PCs to avoid AoOs. I'm thinking "You don't have to be
an idiot" takes precendence over "you have to get as close as
possible".

Naturally, you won't always be outside where there is a lot of room.
Down in a dungeon things can be a lot closer. So I was wondering -
what would be the effect of a MINDLESS RAGE followed by a SANCTUARY
spell (assuming failure to save against both spells)?

MINDLESS RAGE makes you attempt to make a melee attack against the
spellcaster. A failed save against SANCTUARY means the victim can't
follow through with an intended attack. The victim loses the attack
action and can't directly attack the spellcaster for the duration of
the spell.

I don't see this as any different from a spellcaster flying around
where you can't get at her. Just because it's impossible to launch an
attack that doesn't mean you are freed from the requirement to run
over as close as possible. But I've seen some DMs treat SANCTUARY as
a sort INVISIBILITY where the victim no longer notices the spellcaster
even if the spellcaster is right in front of them - and if it's
essentially "breaking the line of sight", that voids the MINDLESS RAGE
spell.

What do the rest of you think about this?

[tussock]

Post by Harold Groot
My character has been working on her "Captain Drawfire" role and has
just come across MINDLESS RAGE. This appears to have tremendous
possibilities.

<snip>

Post by Harold Groot
What do the rest of you think about this?

/Fear/. /Hold Person/. What you've got there is a lesser effect,
and not a problem.

Personally, IMO, IMC, etc, I'd have /Mindless Rage/ automatically
counter and dispel a /Sanctuary/, directly opposed spell effects (must
attack me in melee, can't attack me in melee) should negate each
other.
I'd also put "impossible to get to" in with "not in LOS". Those
who can fly would fly to you, those who couldn't would have the spell
suppressed (or just have them rage on your allies, whatever). That's
general principles of sympathetic magic though, not reasons of game
balance: you can't magic someone into wanting to get to you right now
if they /can't/ get to you right now.

--
tussock

[Harold Groot]

Post by tussock

Post by Harold Groot
My character has been working on her "Captain Drawfire" role and has
just come across MINDLESS RAGE. This appears to have tremendous
possibilities.

<snip>

Post by Harold Groot
What do the rest of you think about this?

/Fear/. /Hold Person/. What you've got there is a lesser effect,
and not a problem.
Personally, IMO, IMC, etc, I'd have /Mindless Rage/ automatically
counter and dispel a /Sanctuary/, directly opposed spell effects (must
attack me in melee, can't attack me in melee) should negate each
other.
I'd also put "impossible to get to" in with "not in LOS". Those
who can fly would fly to you, those who couldn't would have the spell
suppressed (or just have them rage on your allies, whatever). That's
general principles of sympathetic magic though, not reasons of game
balance: you can't magic someone into wanting to get to you right now
if they /can't/ get to you right now.
tussock

I considered that some might think it would be a counteracting effect,
which is why I asked for opinions. But the "must attack, can't
attack" can happen strictly through the MINDLESS RAGE spell by itself.
As I read it, if the person who casts MINDLESS RAGE is flying out of
reach of the victim (say, 20 feet out from the edge of a cliff), the
spell still requires that victim to move as close as possible (in this
case, most likely to the edge of the cliff). The victim is not
allowed to think "I can't attack him out there, therefore I'll ignore
him and do something else." The victim has to move as close as
possible and if possible TRY to melee with him - unless that would
require doing something idiotic or suicidal (like leaping off the
cliff to slash at the spellcaster once before plunging to his death).


With the 2E version of SANCTUARY it would be different. In that
version it says that the person who fails his save "...loses track of
and totally ignores the warded creature." That would certainly break
the line of sight required for MINDLESS RAGE.

But the 3.5E version of SANCTUARY no longer has that effect. All it
says is "If the save fails the opponent can't follow through with the
attack, that part of its action is lost, and it can't directly attack
the warded creature for the duration of the spell." So as I see it,
the person under MINDLESS RAGE should move as close as possible,
almost foaming at the mouth, yelling challenges and insults, and would
keep trying to launch attacks - hoping each time that the SANCTUARY
had expired and that the attack could now strike home.

[Keith Davies]

Post by Harold Groot

Post by tussock
I'd also put "impossible to get to" in with "not in LOS". Those
who can fly would fly to you, those who couldn't would have the spell
suppressed (or just have them rage on your allies, whatever). That's
general principles of sympathetic magic though, not reasons of game
balance: you can't magic someone into wanting to get to you right now
if they /can't/ get to you right now.

I considered that some might think it would be a counteracting effect,
which is why I asked for opinions. But the "must attack, can't
attack" can happen strictly through the MINDLESS RAGE spell by itself.
As I read it, if the person who casts MINDLESS RAGE is flying out of
reach of the victim (say, 20 feet out from the edge of a cliff), the
spell still requires that victim to move as close as possible (in this
case, most likely to the edge of the cliff). The victim is not
allowed to think "I can't attack him out there, therefore I'll ignore
him and do something else." The victim has to move as close as
possible and if possible TRY to melee with him - unless that would
require doing something idiotic or suicidal (like leaping off the
cliff to slash at the spellcaster once before plunging to his death).
With the 2E version of SANCTUARY it would be different. In that
version it says that the person who fails his save "...loses track of
and totally ignores the warded creature." That would certainly break
the line of sight required for MINDLESS RAGE.
But the 3.5E version of SANCTUARY no longer has that effect. All it
says is "If the save fails the opponent can't follow through with the
attack, that part of its action is lost, and it can't directly attack
the warded creature for the duration of the spell." So as I see it,
the person under MINDLESS RAGE should move as close as possible,
almost foaming at the mouth, yelling challenges and insults, and would
keep trying to launch attacks - hoping each time that the SANCTUARY
had expired and that the attack could now strike home.

In this case I'd allow him ranged attacks. He would *prefer* melee, he
wants to feel the impact, to crush his enemy in his own hands... but if
the coward is too cravenly to stand where he can get the beating he so,
so deserves the spell's target can fall back on less... *satisfying*
options.


Keith

[Harold Groot]

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:07:35 +0000, Keith Davies

Post by Keith Davies

Post by Harold Groot

Post by tussock
I'd also put "impossible to get to" in with "not in LOS". Those
who can fly would fly to you, those who couldn't would have the spell
suppressed (or just have them rage on your allies, whatever). That's
general principles of sympathetic magic though, not reasons of game
balance: you can't magic someone into wanting to get to you right now
if they /can't/ get to you right now.

I considered that some might think it would be a counteracting effect,
which is why I asked for opinions. But the "must attack, can't
attack" can happen strictly through the MINDLESS RAGE spell by itself.
As I read it, if the person who casts MINDLESS RAGE is flying out of
reach of the victim (say, 20 feet out from the edge of a cliff), the
spell still requires that victim to move as close as possible (in this
case, most likely to the edge of the cliff). The victim is not
allowed to think "I can't attack him out there, therefore I'll ignore
him and do something else." The victim has to move as close as
possible and if possible TRY to melee with him - unless that would
require doing something idiotic or suicidal (like leaping off the
cliff to slash at the spellcaster once before plunging to his death).
With the 2E version of SANCTUARY it would be different. In that
version it says that the person who fails his save "...loses track of
and totally ignores the warded creature." That would certainly break
the line of sight required for MINDLESS RAGE.
But the 3.5E version of SANCTUARY no longer has that effect. All it
says is "If the save fails the opponent can't follow through with the
attack, that part of its action is lost, and it can't directly attack
the warded creature for the duration of the spell." So as I see it,
the person under MINDLESS RAGE should move as close as possible,
almost foaming at the mouth, yelling challenges and insults, and would
keep trying to launch attacks - hoping each time that the SANCTUARY
had expired and that the attack could now strike home.

In this case I'd allow him ranged attacks. He would *prefer* melee, he
wants to feel the impact, to crush his enemy in his own hands... but if
the coward is too cravenly to stand where he can get the beating he so,
so deserves the spell's target can fall back on less... *satisfying*
options.
Keith

MINDLESS RAGE specifically prohibits ranged attacks.

It says the target is "filled with so great a rage that it can do
nothing but focus on engaging you in personal physical combat.... the
subject can't make ranged attacks, cast spells, or activate magic
items that require a command word, a spell trigger or spell completion
to function. The subject can't make any attack against a creature
other than you."

So MINDLESS RAGE seems to be a great way to completely neutralize one
opponent if you've got (a) great defenses (great AC plus MIRROR IMAGE
plus BLUR, etc.) or (b) a way to prevent him from reaching you (flying
out of reach), or (c) a way prevent him from completing his attacks
when he tries to launch them (SANCTUARY).

And while the affected creature "will not charge off a cliff in an
attempt to reach you", standing on the edge of the cliff (shouting and
waving his melee weapons threateningly) seems pretty much required -
making a SLIDE spell suddenly useful. If it made a save against the
first SLIDE attempt I would allow it to stand back from the edge of
the cliff thereafter - the requirement to get as close as possible
would then be overridden by the "is by no means rendered idiotic or
suicidal". Once the subject is aware of the threat of a SLIDE spell,
standing on the edge of the cliff DOES come under the "idiotic or
suicidal" behavior. But the use of SLIDE spells in 3.5E seems pretty
rare in my experience. I wouldn't expect someone in MINDLESS RAGE to
automatically treat standing on the edge of a cliff as suicidal. But
that's why someone with SCRIBE SCROLLS makes scrolls of seldom-used
spells - just in case there ever IS a use for them. <BWEG>

[Keith Davies]

Post by Harold Groot
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:07:35 +0000, Keith Davies

Post by Keith Davies
In this case I'd allow him ranged attacks. He would *prefer* melee, he
wants to feel the impact, to crush his enemy in his own hands... but if
the coward is too cravenly to stand where he can get the beating he so,
so deserves the spell's target can fall back on less... *satisfying*
options.
Keith

MINDLESS RAGE specifically prohibits ranged attacks.

Oh, I realize that. I'm just suggesting that someone trying to twink
things ("come get me, nyah nyah nyah!") may find that he gets a slap
from a distance.

Post by Harold Groot
So MINDLESS RAGE seems to be a great way to completely neutralize one
opponent if you've got (a) great defenses (great AC plus MIRROR IMAGE
plus BLUR, etc.) or (b) a way to prevent him from reaching you (flying
out of reach), or (c) a way prevent him from completing his attacks
when he tries to launch them (SANCTUARY).

What level was this again? If a single spell can neutralize an opponent
(and in this case perhaps cause him to stand still while you rain fiery
death on him), I'm not impressed.

Tanking up and casting this, no problem. I'm not sure I like the way
it's written if it can have the indirect effect of hosing the opponent
as it does as written.

Eww, nasty sentence. It deserves to be taken out back and shot.


Keith

[Harold Groot]

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 20:36:00 +0000, Keith Davies

Post by Keith Davies

Post by Harold Groot
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:07:35 +0000, Keith Davies

Post by Keith Davies
In this case I'd allow him ranged attacks. He would *prefer* melee, he
wants to feel the impact, to crush his enemy in his own hands... but if
the coward is too cravenly to stand where he can get the beating he so,
so deserves the spell's target can fall back on less... *satisfying*
options.
Keith

MINDLESS RAGE specifically prohibits ranged attacks.

Oh, I realize that. I'm just suggesting that someone trying to twink
things ("come get me, nyah nyah nyah!") may find that he gets a slap
from a distance.

Post by Harold Groot
So MINDLESS RAGE seems to be a great way to completely neutralize one
opponent if you've got (a) great defenses (great AC plus MIRROR IMAGE
plus BLUR, etc.) or (b) a way to prevent him from reaching you (flying
out of reach), or (c) a way prevent him from completing his attacks
when he tries to launch them (SANCTUARY).

What level was this again? If a single spell can neutralize an opponent
(and in this case perhaps cause him to stand still while you rain fiery
death on him), I'm not impressed.

It's a Bard 2, Wizard/Sorcerer 2 spell with a Will Save to negate.
Big tough Fighter-types tend to have poor Will saves, so there's a
reasonable chance that it will affect them. It lasts 1r/level.

Post by Keith Davies
Tanking up and casting this, no problem. I'm not sure I like the way
it's written if it can have the indirect effect of hosing the opponent
as it does as written.

When we have plenty of time to prepare (rare) my PC has already
started doing a "Captain Drawfire" routine of tanking up and letting
enemies try to hit her rather than someone with lower AC. It has been
somewhat effective but not overwhelmingly so. If they CAN hit her
it's not a good tactic, and if they CAN'T hit her they often just go
after someone else. Doing this introduces the DM to the general idea
of Captain Drawfire before adding MINDLESS RAGE to the mix.

Of course, our DM is willing to forbid the use of certain spells if he
decides they shouldn't be in the game. If this shows itself to be too
strong for a 2nd level spell, it could get banned.

Post by Keith Davies
--
Keith Davies "Do you know what is in beer? The strength
http://www.kjdavies.org/ another beer." -- Owen, discussing work

[Rick Pikul]

Post by Keith Davies

Post by Harold Groot
MINDLESS RAGE specifically prohibits ranged attacks.

Oh, I realize that. I'm just suggesting that someone trying to twink
things ("come get me, nyah nyah nyah!") may find that he gets a slap
from a distance.

Perhaps allowing the use of thrown, but not fired, weapons? Combine that
with limiting his choices to that which is readily accessible, (so no
digging around in a pack, but he might throw the pack itself).

So if our involuntary berserker is stuck looking at our hero who is
floating out of reach, he can start throwing whatever is at hand.

[Seebs]

Post by Harold Groot
What do the rest of you think about this?

What level is the spell, and what's its duration?

Beloved Spouse suggests: The target should be allowed to throw stuff at
you if it can't reach you. If it hasn't got anything to throw, it should
throw its shoes. If it can't do that, it should cry and call you names.

-s

[Harold Groot]

Post by Seebs

Post by Harold Groot
What do the rest of you think about this?

What level is the spell, and what's its duration?

2nd level (Wiz/Sor, also Bard), 1r/level, single target, Will Save to
negate, SR applies.

Compare it to WEB. That can incapacitate many enemies at once,
they're significantly hampered (entangled) even when they DO make the
reflex save, it lasts 10m/level and there's no SR. MINDLESS RAGE
doesn't seem overpowering compared to that - but that may be because
I'm planning to be on the throwing end, not the receiving end. <g>

[azothath]

Post by Harold Groot
My character has been working on her "Captain Drawfire" role and has
just come across MINDLESS RAGE.  This appears to have tremendous
possibilities.

Spell Compendium
Sor/Wiz 2
Ench (cmplsn)[mnd afct]
Rng: med
Trgt: 1 crtr
Dur: Lvl r
SV: Will neg
SR: Y

Post by Harold Groot
Normally she has OVERLAND FLIGHT up, so it would appear when outdoors
that she can cast MINDLESS RAGE on some big tough fighter types (with
poor Will saves) and then just fly around having them chase her.
There is nothing in the spell description that says they can give up
the chase if getting to her is impossible.  They also can't use ranged
attacks or spells against her, or attack anyone else.  So it would
seem possible to just fly back and forth, making the enemy do nothing
but chase her.  If she can get several enemies to fail Will saves she
can essentially take them out of the fight.

yes and no... they can defend themselves. So if your friends attack
the enspelled critters...

Post by Harold Groot
I'm wondering if she can lead her victims right past her teammates
(giving them Attacks Of Opportunity).  

see above

Post by Harold Groot
<snip>
So I was wondering -
what would be the effect of a MINDLESS RAGE followed by a SANCTUARY
spell (assuming failure to save against both spells)?
MINDLESS RAGE makes you attempt to make a melee attack against the
spellcaster.  A failed save against SANCTUARY means the victim can't
follow through with an intended attack.  The victim loses the attack
action and can't directly attack the spellcaster for the duration of
the spell.

correct, the affected creature is just in your face attempting to
provoke an attack (which will end the Sanctuary).
He can physically block you, thus, Sanctuary guy will not be getting
off any touch spells on your friends.
Sanctuary guy cannot cast another Mindless Rage AND maintain the
current Sanctuary.
Pretty much you've taken yourself AND the opponent out of the fight
for your caster Level in rounds AT BEST.

Post by Harold Groot
<snip>
What do the rest of you think about this?

that you think you have found gold, but alas... it's just pyrite

I'd interpret it's actual use is to stop ranged attacks (spellcasters
or bowmen). A well placed Darkness, Obscuring Mist or Fog would do the
same... If you target the opponent's combat leader you may get more
for your bargain than desired, as you may become their sole target and
his buddies CAN fire their bows.

For a spell comparison - try Charm Person Wiz 1, lasts hours and the
person actually will HELP you attain your goals or fight his former
friends.
T Hideous Laughter, Wiz2, (PH), does about the same thing, but drops
them at a distance and keeps them down. Seems usually that no actions
and no MOV is better than chasing the spellcaster with readied
actions...

other generally amusing spells...

Baleful Transposition, Wiz 2, (SplCmp), movement, but can be VERY
handy.
Force Ladder, Wiz 2, (SplCmp), a basically unbreakable 2'x60'
transparent ladder, much 3-stooges fun for blocking, tripping, and
getting across pressure plates, and then you can carry it with you....
take it as an exotic weapon....
Slapping Hand, Wiz2, (SplCmp), a boon to fighting in close combat for
others in your party... Wizards should stay out of combat anyways.
Phantasmal Assailants, Wiz2, (SplCmp), and your Will save and AC were
what? <eg>
Wraithstrike, Wiz2, (SplCmp), (banned in several games) turns a round
of HTH combat into Touch Atks... very handy to hit armored crtrs or
get by natural armor.

azothath
"INCONCIEVABLE!" yes, I do not think that word means what you think it
means...

[Harold Groot]

On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:13:35 -0800 (PST), azothath

Post by azothath

Post by Harold Groot
Normally she has OVERLAND FLIGHT up, so it would appear when outdoors
that she can cast MINDLESS RAGE on some big tough fighter types (with
poor Will saves) and then just fly around having them chase her.
There is nothing in the spell description that says they can give up
the chase if getting to her is impossible. =A0They also can't use ranged
attacks or spells against her, or attack anyone else. =A0So it would
seem possible to just fly back and forth, making the enemy do nothing
but chase her. =A0If she can get several enemies to fail Will saves she
can essentially take them out of the fight.

yes and no... they can defend themselves. So if your friends attack
the enspelled critters...

Oh, they can defend themselves - in the sense that they don't lose
their DEX bonus against attacks and so on. Your buddy can't do a coup
de grace against a helpless opponent. But the spell says "The subject
can't make any attack against a creature other than you." If the
victim threatens you it has to take a full attack action against you.
If it doesn't threaten you it has to move towards you. If a single
move gets it close enough to threaten you it has to attack. If the
single move doesn't get it close enough it has to take a double move.

Mind you, even if they COULD melee with others who attacked them,
there would still be great benefit to the spell. If you can get
several of the enemy to chase you, then have your friends come over
and gang up on just one of the enemy, the others would not be able to
help. Letting 3 teammates take on the enemy one at a time seems like
a win.

Post by azothath

Post by Harold Groot
I'm wondering if she can lead her victims right past her teammates
(giving them Attacks Of Opportunity). =A0

see above

Well, again, if they are trying to run past my friend to get at me
(and they get attacked in the process), are they allowed to break off
their pursuit of me? Not according to the spell description. For
that matter, my friends can run past them without danger of an AoO.
Again, "Can't make an attack against a creature other than you."