Post/Author/DateTime	Post
The Club 07-06-07, 11:25 AM	Is there any reason why a magic item enchanted with the Protection from Evil spell wouldn't be proof against any sort of continuing charm or compulsion effects? It seems that, say, an amulet of Protection from Evil would be just the thing the average barbarian is looking for to keep from turning on his own team, and all for the price of a first level spell enchantment. Is there errata or something preventing this?
Banatine 07-06-07, 11:36 AM	Compulsion spells do not possess the evil descriptor AFAIK, so protection from evil would not defend you against them.
DracoPhoenix 07-06-07, 11:36 AM	Is there any reason why a magic item enchanted with the Protection from Evil spell wouldn't be proof against any sort of continuing charm or compulsion effects? It seems that, say, an amulet of Protection from Evil would be just the thing the average barbarian is looking for to keep from turning on his own team, and all for the price of a first level spell enchantment. Is there errata or something preventing this? That's assuming that the critter in front of you isn't non-evil ("chaotic neutral" for example) But otherwise, yes - just bear in mind magic item costs go off effect(s) first, not spells used. (i.e. discount for vs evil only, but treat as +2 deflection AC, +2 fort, reflex, will saves, suppression of charm & compulsion, possession effects (mind protection regardless of alignment, so no discount on these effects), immune to evil aligned natural weapons) There's also, if you can, the shape meld feat (Magic of Incarnum) and the Planar Ward Soulmeld (also MoI). Same mental protection, but an all day buff for one feat. Your call on the value of a feat) Failing that, Protection from Evil & Persistent spell. (May not be possible, our DM banned PS and I can't remember it's wording)
jaelis 07-06-07, 11:36 AM	I'm not aware of any items granting protection from evil, so why would an errata be necessary? The question you want to ask is, "How much would a ring of protection from evil cost?" That's not a totally easy one to answer, but it is certainly more than the 2000 gp you might be thinking.
tarkin 07-06-07, 11:51 AM	In any case, items are priced on their power, not the spell level. The Spell level is just an ESTIMATE that you are supposed to use if you can not find any other pricing method. Then the DM is supposed to raise/lower it. Similarly, Mage Armor can not give you a +4 armor always on for 2,000 gp. Instead it costs 16,000 gp.
The Club 07-06-07, 11:56 AM	But otherwise, yes - just bear in mind magic item costs go off effect(s) first, not spells used. (i.e. discount for vs evil only, but treat as +2 deflection AC, +2 fort, reflex, will saves, suppression of charm & compulsion, possession effects (mind protection regardless of alignment, so no discount on these effects), immune to evil aligned natural weapons) Ah. I figured you just dumped the spell in there. So, I could get right to the point with the mind protection (or suppression) effect and not mess with the other things (and attendant expense), but the cost of my desired effect would still be pretty significant.
NobodyRemembersThis 07-06-07, 02:08 PM	Also, keep in mind Protection from Evil doesn't say you aren't affect, just that you can't be compelled. It is entirely possible to get hit with a suggestion and then have it take effect after PoE has expired.
DracoPhoenix 07-06-07, 05:58 PM	Ah. I figured you just dumped the spell in there. So, I could get right to the point with the mind protection (or suppression) effect and not mess with the other things (and attendant expense), but the cost of my desired effect would still be pretty significant. Yeah, anything more than 5k gold and it may be worth looking at spending a low level feat :)
NobodyRemembersThis 07-06-07, 07:43 PM	Yeah, anything more than 5k gold and it may be worth looking at spending a low level feat :)What if you based it off of PfE, but only against mind affecting; dropping the rest of the ability. Hmm....still a bit too strong for a low level always on effect. Maybe have it last only 1 minute each time you use it?
runestar 07-06-07, 11:35 PM	So much wrong in this thread...Where do I start?:P Also, keep in mind Protection from Evil doesn't say you aren't affect, just that you can't be compelled. It is entirely possible to get hit with a suggestion and then have it take effect after PoE has expired. That is incorrect. Protection from alignment does not defend you against suggestion at all, as clarified in the 3.0 FAQ. It would protect you from a dominate spell for the duration of the spell (since the spell is merely suppressed, not dispelled). However, suggestion does not grant the user ongoing mental control in the mechanical sense (you simply make the suggestion at the time of casting, and the victim follows it of his own volition). Thus, a fighter protected by prot from evil can still be affected by the mind flayer's suggestion spell if he fails his will save. Also, note the following clause... Second, the barrier blocks any attempt to possess the warded creature (by a magic jar attack, for example) or to exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment (charm) effects and enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject, such as dominate person). The protection does not prevent such effects from targeting the protected creature, but it suppresses the effect for the duration of the protection from evil effect. If the protection from evil effect ends before the effect granting mental control does, the would-be controller would then be able to mentally command the controlled creature. Likewise, the barrier keeps out a possessing life force but does not expel one if it is in place before the spell is cast. This second effect works regardless of alignment. So a protection from whatever alignment spell would protect you from charm/dominate spells and the like, regardless of the caster's alignment.:)
DracoPhoenix 07-07-07, 07:51 AM	What if you based it off of PfE, but only against mind affecting; dropping the rest of the ability. Hmm....still a bit too strong for a low level always on effect. Maybe have it last only 1 minute each time you use it? Consider: Most game play is based of 4 encounters a day, most combat encounters running at less than 10 rounds (1 min). If it was made 4/day, it would work out effectively as "always on" as they could just pop it at the start of the encounter. Cheap loop hole, but a good one to get past a tight DM. :)
jaelis 07-07-07, 08:45 AM	If it was made 4/day, it would work out effectively as "always on" as they could just pop it at the start of the encounter. That's a valuable standard action... if a typical fight lasts five rounds, you just spend one fifth of your combat capacity turning it on. If you base it off quickened PFE and make it a swift action to activate, you get something reasonable.
NobodyRemembersThis 07-07-07, 11:58 AM	(including enchantment (charm) effects and enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject, such as dominate person).Enchantment (Compulsion) [Language-Dependent, Mind-Affecting]. Sorry Runestar, but suggestion can affect the target of a Protection from Evil but doesn't take effect until after the PfE has expired. :)
runestar 07-07-07, 01:23 PM	Sorry Runestar, but suggestion can affect the target of a Protection from Evil but doesn't take effect until after the PfE has expired. Lies!!! :P From the 3.0 FAQ, The second function of the protection from evil spell blocks any attempt to possess the warded creature or to exercise mental control over the creature. What, exactly, counts as mental control? “Mental control” includes all spells of the school of Enchantment that have the Charm subschool, such as animal friendship, charm person, and charm monster. It also includes some Enchantment spells of the Compulsion subschool if those spells grant the caster ongoing control over the subject; such spells include dominate person and dominate monster. Compulsions that merely dictate the subject’s action at the time the spell takes effect are not blocked. Such spells include command, hold person, geas/quest, hypnotism, insanity, Otto’s irresistible dance, random action, suggestion, and zone of truth. Don't get me wrong. Prot from alignment is fairly potent for it lv, but I think people tend to overestimate the degree of its usefulness just a tad too much....
unusualsuspect 07-07-07, 06:02 PM	Primary text trumps secondary text like FAQ, though, Runestar, so the explicit entry in PfE stating it blocks Enchantment (Compulsion) effect and the just-as-explicit Suggestion entry stating its Enchantment (Compulsion) type basically makes the 3.0 FAQ either only functional for 3.0's PfE, which might have had different wording, or just plain ol' wrong.
PhaedrusXY 07-07-07, 06:20 PM	(including enchantment (charm) effects and enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject, such as dominate person). As Runestar stated, Suggestion does not grant you ongoing control over the subject. There is no contradiction between the FAQ and the text.
Witch 07-07-07, 06:32 PM	Primary text trumps secondary text like FAQ, though, Runestar, so the explicit entry in PfE stating it blocks Enchantment (Compulsion) effect and the just-as-explicit Suggestion entry stating its Enchantment (Compulsion) type basically makes the 3.0 FAQ either only functional for 3.0's PfE, which might have had different wording, or just plain ol' wrong. Not really. Look at the quotes again. PfE protects against Compulsion effects that grant ongoing control. Suggestion is a Compulsion effect, but it doesn't grant ongoing control, so it's not protected against.
NobodyRemembersThis 07-07-07, 11:31 PM	You influence the actions of the target creature by suggesting a course of activity (limited to a sentence or two). The suggestion must be worded in such a manner as to make the activity sound reasonable. Asking the creature to do some obviously harmful act automatically negates the effect of the spell. The suggested course of activity can continue for the entire duration. If the suggested activity can be completed in a shorter time, the spell ends when the subject finishes what it was asked to do. You can instead specify conditions that will trigger a special activity during the duration. If the condition is not met before the spell duration expires, the activity is not performed.Suggestion does create an ongoing control, as the target of the spell is compelled to follow your suggestion until the action is completed or the duration of the spell expires. Which, is exactly what Protection from Evil protects against. Oh, and: When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct.The FAQ is 100% wrong in this. As I just proved conclusively, suggestion provides ongoing control which Protection from Evil prevents from working for the duration of the PfE.
runestar 07-08-07, 12:28 AM	Suggestion does create an ongoing control, as the target of the spell is compelled to follow your suggestion until the action is completed or the duration of the spell expires. Which, is exactly what Protection from Evil protects against. It only proves "ongoing control" in the literal sense, but not in the dnd mechanical sense. Spells like dominate person allow the user to continuously exert and re-exert his mental control over the victim. This is what they mean by ongoing control. Suggestion has no such effect. You merely make the suggestion once, at the time of casting, and the victim follows it to the letter thereafter. The part you bolded merely states the duration of the spell. It does not mention anything about suggestion providing ongoing control, simply because you cannot change your instructions once they have been made, unlike dominate person. This is what they mean by "no ongoing control". There is nothing to trump as they are 2 completely separate rules.:)
NobodyRemembersThis 07-08-07, 09:57 AM	Runestar, there is no difference mechanically in the ongoing control aspect. Both have a duration in which the effect continues to apply. If suggestion worked as you are trying to interpret, it would have a duration of instantaneous. It does not. Mechanically, any compulsion that has a duration the target is affected by said compulsion falls under PfE.
runestar 07-08-07, 10:42 AM	Both have a duration in which the effect continues to apply. Which, as I have been trying to explain, is different from the definition of "grants ongoing control". The dominate person example is all too clear. It allows you to issue new commands over the duration of the spell, thus letting you micromanage the target's actions. This is what they meant by "grants ongoing control". And that is what sets it apart from suggestion. There is a reason why the mindflayer is not a free-frag for adventurers who think they are home-free by warding everyone with prot from evil...;)
NobodyRemembersThis 07-08-07, 11:12 AM	See, I dissagree. Mechanically, Dominate and Suggestion have the exact same implementation - both allow continuous control over a targets actions (hence, the duration of the magical effect). The only difference is multiple directions versus single directions. Mechanically, both are the same type of spell. If one is defended against, the other is defended against. And FYI, the Mindflayer's ability is not a charm or compulsion (the mind blast) so PfE couldn't save you anyway. ;)
Nom 07-08-07, 08:23 PM	See, I dissagree.Disagree all you like, but before you declare yourself objectively right, you might like to note that every offical interpretation on the subject disagrees with you. Further, PH pg 173 draws an explicit contrast between compulsions that "allow you to determine the subject's actions when you cast the spell" and those that "give you ongoing control over the subject". dominate is quite clearly the latter; suggestion is quite clearly the former.
NobodyRemembersThis 07-09-07, 12:25 AM	Disagree all you like, but before you declare yourself objectively right, you might like to note that every offical interpretation on the subject disagrees with you. Further, PH pg 173 draws an explicit contrast between compulsions that "allow you to determine the subject's actions when you cast the spell" and those that "give you ongoing control over the subject". dominate is quite clearly the latter; suggestion is quite clearly the former.Where? Protection from Evil says "such as" - it lists an example, yes. It does not specify only Domination like compulsions nor does it specifically exclude Suggestion like compulsions. I have provided direct quotes proving my argument - You have not. The FAQ (3.0 no less) is an invalid argument, as I have provided proof that the PHB overrides the FAQ. So, the FAQ cannot be used as proof here. Provide actual rules proof that the ongoing control of suggestion is excluded. If you cannot, then this discussion really is over. I have provided facts for my conclusion. Please stop arguing with smoke and mirrors and back up your position. I'll summarize my argument. 1.) Protection from Evil protects against ongoing control from charms and compulsions. 2.) Suggestion and Dominate both provide ongoing control. 3.) Protection from Evil suppresses the effects of Suggestion and Dominate spells only for the duration of the Protection from Evil.
runestar 07-09-07, 01:20 AM	The FAQ (3.0 no less) is an invalid argument, as I have provided proof that the PHB overrides the FAQ. So, the FAQ cannot be used as proof here. It is invalid only if the spells have changed mechanically in 3.5. But they remain the same as before. Thus, the 3.0 FAQ would still be applicable here as it addresses the exact same rules conundrum as it did before. As for your proof, your quotes have proven nothing. And stop saying that the PHB overrides the FAQ. There is nothing to override, because the PHB says nothing that explicitly contradicts the FAQ here. It is getting annoying. 1.) Protection from Evil protects against ongoing control from charms and compulsions. 2.) Suggestion and Dominate both provide ongoing control. 3.) Protection from Evil suppresses the effects of Suggestion and Dominate spells only for the duration of the Protection from Evil. No.2 is where we disagree. I have explained my stand as to why I believe the effect of suggestion cannot be construed as "providing ongoing control", as have you as to why it does. It seems that we each have our own interpretations of just what "ongoing control" actually entails. I cannot convince you that I am right, just as I do not find your explanation convincing enough to sway me otherwise as well. However, the FAQ has explained their own interpretation of what defines "ongoing control". Considering that there does not exist anywhere else, an explanation of just what this entails, it seems to make sense to cater to the Sage's definition, considering that they wrote the game, and would thus be more familiar with all the technical jargon they use.:confused:
Witch 07-09-07, 06:52 AM	Let's see. We have 2 interpretations of the rules. One interpretation renders an entire school of magic useless, as a first level spell, without being able to be overcome by means of a caster level check or similar. That same interpretation is also clarified by the designers of the game not to be the correct interpretation. Yet you stand by it regardless. Well, you can if you want, ofcourse. I'll just point out the futility in your argument, because it'll only cause more trouble and is clearly not the intended effect.
DracoPhoenix 07-09-07, 07:52 AM	I would have thought the simple fact that suggestion is a compulsion effect, and has a duration, would have made is susceptible to the protection - at least for as long as PfE lasts. Yes, the instruction is near instant & at the start of the spell, but the spell has a duration in which the suggestion affects the target. Or would a dominated individual given only a single instruction be similarly affected? Just my $0.03 (inflation)
NobodyRemembersThis 07-09-07, 09:25 AM	This argument is over, Witch and Runestar. Trying to check something Witch said, I actually found the rule that you were both looking for to prove your argument. Compulsion A compulsion spell forces the subject to act in some manner or changes the way her mind works. Some compulsion spells determine the subject’s actions or the effects on the subject, some compulsion spells allow you to determine the subject’s actions when you cast the spell, and others give you ongoing control over the subject.It seems that WotC did create the distinction you were arguing for. While it could have use some examples to help the rule, it is good enough to create the distinction about which abilities would be protected against with Protection from Evil. Consider my objection withdrawn. :)
Leilond 07-09-07, 09:29 AM	The reported faq are 3.0 so they aren't simply not a "primary source"... they're not a source at all for 3.5 issues And telling suggestion doesn't provide "ongoing controll" is at least "strange"... it force you to act until you complete the action, that means you must follow the order you recive for a long time... isn't that "ongoing"?
Nom 07-09-07, 10:12 AM	Trying to check something Witch said, I actually found the rule that you were both looking for to prove your argument.You mean the one from PH pg 173 that I referenced above?
NobodyRemembersThis 07-09-07, 01:32 PM	You mean the one from PH pg 173 that I referenced above?Don't have the PHB with me; I was referencing the SRD. Sorry. Is it the description of Compulsions?
Nom 07-09-07, 11:56 PM	Don't have the PHB with me; I was referencing the SRD. Sorry. Is it the description of Compulsions?Yup. In chapter 10 where it details the subschools of enchantment and their effect. It just looked a little silly to have you strongly dismiss my reference and then quote the exact text I was referring to. :) Perhaps I should have given the SRD as well as the PH reference, but I tend to go directly to the PH for fine points since the SRD sometimes omits key explanatory text.
Kyuketsukiouji 07-10-07, 01:23 AM	The reported faq are 3.0 so they aren't simply not a "primary source"... they're not a source at all for 3.5 issues And telling suggestion doesn't provide "ongoing controll" is at least "strange"... it force you to act until you complete the action, that means you must follow the order you recive for a long time... isn't that "ongoing"? It's ongoing effect, not ongoing control. If it was control, you could change your target's actions under suggestion. In any case, the subject has been categorically put to rest. Charm Person and Dominate Person are "ongoing control" effects, Hold Person, Command and Suggestion are not. And a 3.0 faq is a source for 3.5 rulings, by WotC's statement that all 3.0 material is valid in 3.5 unless explicitely overridden by 3.5 rules. Which this isn't.