Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Community Member parvo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pigmy Drow Paradise
    Posts
    4,502

    Default Does Protection From Evil protect from Command and Greater Command?

    Does Protection From Evil protect from Command and Greater Command? Seems like it should.
    M O R T A L V O Y A G E
    Permadeath Guild
    Stay Hard

  2. #2
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    19,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by parvo View Post
    Does Protection From Evil protect from Command and Greater Command? Seems like it should.
    That depends on what you mean?

    Does it make you immune to them? No. Can it increase your saves vs. them? Yes, assuming the monster casting it is evil.

    Unfortunately the only spells that PfE makes us immune to is domination.

  3. #3
    Community Member Talon_Moonshadow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seminole, FL
    Posts
    10,454

    Default

    No.
    Except maybe increasing saves.

    It should.
    You can argue all kinds of other spells, but Commanding you to lay down sure seems like a mental command to me. (dancing too grrrrr)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jandric View Post
    ..., but I honestly think the solution is to group with less whiny people.

  4. #4
    Community Member Laith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    3,150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Talon Moonshadow View Post
    It should.
    You can argue all kinds of other spells, but Commanding you to lay down sure seems like a mental command to me. (dancing too grrrrr)
    Wizards seems to have accepted a broad definition of "ongoing control"

    personally, i think that's FAR too powerful for a level1 spell, especially in DDO where 1min/level is effectively "always".

    Ask Wizards on the subject

    IMO the spell is poorly written, but of course i'm against the fact that D&D includes so many "absolute immunity" effects.
    Afterall: this means that a lvl1 wizard with a single lvl1 buff is immune to the mental control of the most powerful creatures/casters imaginable, no questions asked.
    Last edited by Laith; 07-24-2008 at 10:26 AM.

  5. #5
    Community Member Talon_Moonshadow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seminole, FL
    Posts
    10,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laith View Post
    Wizards seems to have accepted a broad definition of "ongoing control"

    personally, i think that's FAR too powerful for a level1 spell, especially in DDO where 1min/level is effectively "always".

    Ask Wizards on the subject

    IMO the spell is poorly written, but of course i'm against the fact that D&D includes so many "absolute immunity" effects.
    Afterall: this means that a lvl1 wizard with a single lvl1 buff is immune to the mental control of the most powerful creatures/casters imaginable, no questions asked.
    All buffs in DDO are more powerful than in PnP. Because we don't explore for an hour before we enter a fight. We can buff at the beginning of an adventure (and also know what buffs we need, because someone has done this quest a thousand times).
    And not have to waste time in the beginning of a fight buffing.

    Very powerful.
    Plus being abale to cast the same spell over and over again without using all our spell slots to do it.

    There is very little in DDO that we can be compelled by magic to do. They can't charm us and give us orders.
    But they can tell us to dance and lay down. And IMO, PfE should definately work against those......just like it is supposed to.

    Hold is debatable. it's not a command to hold still.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jandric View Post
    ..., but I honestly think the solution is to group with less whiny people.

  6. #6
    Community Member parvo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pigmy Drow Paradise
    Posts
    4,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laith View Post
    Wizards seems to have accepted a broad definition of "ongoing control"

    personally, i think that's FAR too powerful for a level1 spell, especially in DDO where 1min/level is effectively "always".

    Ask Wizards on the subject

    IMO the spell is poorly written, but of course i'm against the fact that D&D includes so many "absolute immunity" effects.
    Afterall: this means that a lvl1 wizard with a single lvl1 buff is immune to the mental control of the most powerful creatures/casters imaginable, no questions asked.
    Which, of course, is only a problem here in DDO, not DND. The solution is allowing enemy casters access to all spells beneath their difficulty. For instance, an unamed elite shaman should have access to cause fear, Magic Missile, etc... The result would be similar to PnP, where you can't allways pre-buff for everything and even if you know all the potential spells, you may not have resources to get everything covered.
    Last edited by parvo; 07-24-2008 at 06:43 PM. Reason: Because not is not spelled nod
    M O R T A L V O Y A G E
    Permadeath Guild
    Stay Hard

  7. #7
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    17,552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laith View Post
    Wizards seems to have accepted a broad definition of "ongoing control"
    No, they do not. The Q&A column linked to is blatantly incorrect, as is obvious if you read the PHB section introducing you to the different schools of magic. It explains that Enchantment spells come in two kinds, charm and compulsion, and that compulsion comes in a further two kinds- those that give ongoing control, and those that don't. If the spellcaster has no opportunity to change his directions after preparing the spell, then it is not ongoing control, and Protection From Evil has no effect.


    Quote Originally Posted by Laith View Post
    IMO the spell is poorly written, but of course i'm against the fact that D&D includes so many "absolute immunity" effects.
    Afterall: this means that a lvl1 wizard with a single lvl1 buff is immune to the mental control of the most powerful creatures/casters imaginable, no questions asked.
    It's true that D&D has too many immunity spells. It was probably correct for DDO to intentionally leave out the Mind Blank spell, even though that would've been a simple addition. If they do ever add Mind Blank, it should be somehow nerfed (such as having a very short duration, or allowing an opposed caster level check at some penalty)

  8. #8
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    17,552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by parvo View Post
    Which, of course, is only a problem here in DDO, not DND.
    Wrong: it's also a big problem in D&D.

    Does your tentacle face grapple-monster with Improved Grapple, Improved Grab, and the Reaping Mauler prestige class want to use his sole ability and actually grapple a PC enemy? Then he'd better hope he can beat a caster-level check to dispel the inevitable Ring of Free Action.

    You may notice that D&D 4e has vigorously scrubbed out any kind of blanket immunity like that. In fact, they probably took it too far... but it has certainly improved their game balance.

    The only way you could accurately claim it's "not a problem" in D&D is to mean that in tabletop D&D, it's a lot easier to change a rule that isn't working right. But that's no defense for having bad rules.
    Last edited by Angelus_dead; 07-24-2008 at 07:07 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload