HYPERBOREA » Hypnosis vs Undead

mabon5127 · 10/06/2018 8:31 pm

Does the Hypnosis spell work on Undead? By the strict interpretation of the rule it would but....I wanted the opinion of other GM's. Thanks!

Chainsaw · 10/06/2018 8:55 pm

mabon5127 wrote:
Does the Hypnosis spell work on Undead? By the strict interpretation of the rule it would but....I wanted the opinion of other GM's. Thanks!

My gut is no because it doesn't sound like it makes sense on the surface, but I'll go read it and report back with an opinion.

mabon5127 · 10/06/2018 9:05 pm

Chainsaw wrote:
mabon5127 wrote:
Does the Hypnosis spell work on Undead? By the strict interpretation of the rule it would but....I wanted the opinion of other GM's. Thanks!
My gut is no because it doesn't sound like it makes sense on the surface, but I'll go read it and report back with an opinion.

I should have said Hypnotic Pattern. Not Hypnosis.

Chainsaw · 10/06/2018 9:10 pm

mabon5127 wrote:
Chainsaw wrote:
mabon5127 wrote:
Does the Hypnosis spell work on Undead? By the strict interpretation of the rule it would but....I wanted the opinion of other GM's. Thanks!
My gut is no because it doesn't sound like it makes sense on the surface, but I'll go read it and report back with an opinion.
I should have said Hypnotic Pattern. Not Hypnosis.

No worries. So, at first, my gut was that it should not work on something like skeletons or similarly "mindless" undead, but I also don't like being the sort of referee that nerfs a sorcerer's spells over splitting hairs. I mean, it's magic, right? Why take the fun out of it by making it overly scientific. So, hell yeah, in my games, your weird, sorcerous kaleidoscope eyes can even affect undead.

mabon5127 · 10/06/2018 9:12 pm

Chainsaw wrote:
mabon5127 wrote:
Chainsaw wrote:
My gut is no because it doesn't sound like it makes sense on the surface, but I'll go read it and report back with an opinion.
I should have said Hypnotic Pattern. Not Hypnosis.
No worries. So, at first, my gut was that it should not work on something like skeletons or similarly "mindless" undead, but I also don't like being the sort of referee that nerfs a sorcerer's spells over splitting hairs. I mean, it's magic, right? Why take the fun out of it by making it overly scientific. So, hell yeah, in my games, your weird, sorcerous kaleidoscope eyes can even affect undead.

You read my thoughts on this completely. Thanks for the input.

Chainsaw · 10/06/2018 9:30 pm

mabon5127 wrote:
Chainsaw wrote:
mabon5127 wrote:
I should have said Hypnotic Pattern. Not Hypnosis.
No worries. So, at first, my gut was that it should not work on something like skeletons or similarly "mindless" undead, but I also don't like being the sort of referee that nerfs a sorcerer's spells over splitting hairs. I mean, it's magic, right? Why take the fun out of it by making it overly scientific. So, hell yeah, in my games, your weird, sorcerous kaleidoscope eyes can even affect undead.
You read my thoughts on this completely. Thanks for the input.

Sure. I can't promise others won't disagree, but it's my opinion (for now!).

Iron Ranger · 10/07/2018 10:44 am

I don't want to give my players any ideas....but I'm with Chainsaw on this one too.

Blackadder23 · 10/07/2018 3:01 pm

I like undead to be at least a little scary (even skeletons) so I probably would rule against it. I believe you could argue that skeletons are technically "unseeing" since their eyes are rotted out of the sockets.

However, I don't see anything in the rules that disallows it (as opposed to AD&D, where skeletons are specifically listed as immune to "charm" spells, under which rubric I would place hypnotic pattern).

Chainsaw · 10/07/2018 10:57 pm

Blackadder23 wrote:
I believe you could argue that skeletons are technically "unseeing" since their eyes are rotted out of the sockets.

So, I accidentally read Hypnotism instead Hypnotic Pattern, which, as you point out, does specifically exclude blind and unseeing creatures, into which category I would put skeletons (and zombies). Changing my mind as a result. For what its worth, I don't think Hypnotism would work either based on my reading of Hypnotic Pattern. Sorry Morgan and Iron Ranger. I'm a party pooper referee after all!

achiriaco · 10/07/2018 11:33 pm

I would say no it does not work.

mabon5127 · 10/08/2018 5:13 am

Chainsaw wrote:
Blackadder23 wrote:
I believe you could argue that skeletons are technically "unseeing" since their eyes are rotted out of the sockets.
So, I accidentally read Hypnotism instead Hypnotic Pattern, which, as you point out, does specifically exclude blind and unseeing creatures, into which category I would put skeletons (and zombies). Changing my mind as a result. For what its worth, I don't think Hypnotism would work either based on my reading of Hypnotic Pattern. Sorry Morgan and Iron Ranger. I'm a party pooper referee after all!

Nah, that's cool. It's a gut call as skels have no eyes but can target with weapons. I agree with your original thought. Maybe I'm just a wimpy GM!!

Chainsaw · 10/08/2018 6:29 am

mabon5127 wrote:
Nah, that's cool. It's a gut call as skels have no eyes but can target with weapons. I agree with your original thought. Maybe I'm just a wimpy GM!!

Ha! Nah. I'm not unsympathetic to avoiding unnecessarily complex sets of exceptions and to simply letting sorcery work. At the same time, I also want the sorcery areas to be genuinely different in practice, not merely to have the same spells with different names. In this context, handling illusory and sensory-based effects with undead always creates some food for thought. I think it's possible to read blind/unseeing as only meaning something like a slime, but in this spell's case I'm now leaning toward a broader view. I probably wouldn't let it work on an Iron Automaton either, for example, even though the automaton might be stylized to have eyes and be able to target with weapons.

mabon5127 · 10/08/2018 6:45 am

Chainsaw wrote:
mabon5127 wrote:
Nah, that's cool. It's a gut call as skels have no eyes but can target with weapons. I agree with your original thought. Maybe I'm just a wimpy GM!!
Ha! Nah. I'm not unsympathetic to avoiding unnecessarily complex sets of exceptions and to simply letting sorcery work. At the same time, I also want the sorcery areas to be genuinely different in practice, not merely to have the same spells with different names. In this context, handling illusory and sensory-based effects with undead always creates some food for thought. I think it's possible to read blind/unseeing as only meaning something like a slime, but in this spell's case I'm now leaning toward a broader view. I probably wouldn't let it work on an Iron Automaton either, for example, even though the automaton might be stylized to have eyes and be able to target with weapons.

Yeah its tough. I tend to think of minor undead as having once done things as the "living" do and now are dead. Therefore just as they walk by magic as they did once, they see by magic as they once did. This magic sight can be messed with just as their "living" sight once could have been.

Part of the fun of this school of games is that circumstance not rules is important. What if the undead were "The Blind Dead" as per the movie? Crusaders blinded before being burned to death then rising again for vengeance! They would blissfully avoid this spell as they found prey by some sense the living thing.

Chainsaw · 10/08/2018 6:49 am

mabon5127 wrote:
Yeah its tough. I tend to think of minor undead as having once done things as the "living" do and now are dead. Therefore just as they walk by magic as they did once, they see by magic as they once did. This magic sight can be messed with just as their "living" sight once could have been.

Very plausible interpretation... now you have me reconsidering again, haha!

So, would you allow skeletons to fall into an illusory pit trap?

mabon5127 wrote:
Part of the fun of this school of games is that circumstance not rules is important. What if the undead were "The Blind Dead" as per the movie? Crusaders blinded before being burned to death then rising again for vengeance! They would blissfully avoid this spell as they found prey by some sense the living thing.

All good points!

mabon5127 · 10/08/2018 7:00 am

Chainsaw wrote:
So, would you allow skeletons to fall into an illusory pit trap?

Other than the image being super funny!!?

Off the cuff without reading the spells I probably would. I would allow a Mirror Image to affect them for the same reason. If the description said that they have some sort of "Sense the Living" power after they became undead then it would change things. Like you had said if there is a grey area I tend to give the characters the benefit of the doubt unless I have a specific adventure circumstance as the "The Blind Dead" above.

Chainsaw · 10/08/2018 7:02 am

mabon5127 wrote:
Chainsaw wrote:
So, would you allow skeletons to fall into an illusory pit trap?

Other than the image being super funny!!?

Off the cuff without reading the spells I probably would. I would allow a Mirror Image to affect them for the same reason. If the description said that they have some sort of "Sense the Living" power after they became undead then it would change things. Like you had said if there is a grey area I tend to give the characters the benefit of the doubt unless I have a specific adventure circumstance as the "The Blind Dead" above.

Hmmm.. all good points! You may have shifted me back to my original position, haha! At the very least, I think it shows there's plenty of room for referees to go their own ways here.

mabon5127 · 10/08/2018 7:19 am

Chainsaw wrote:
. I probably wouldn't let it work on an Iron Automaton either, for example, even though the automaton might be stylized to have eyes and be able to target with weapons.

Though in true Sword and Sorcery fashion a sacrifice would have to be made and the fresh organs be placed within canopic like niches within the Automaton where now the brain, eyes, lungs, heart, and vitals are stored!!! The creature rises only to do its masters bidding with vague recollections of its former existence!

Chainsaw · 10/08/2018 7:21 am

mabon5127 wrote:
Chainsaw wrote:
. I probably wouldn't let it work on an Iron Automaton either, for example, even though the automaton might be stylized to have eyes and be able to target with weapons.
Though in true Sword and Sorcery fashion a sacrifice would have to be made and the fresh organs be placed within canopic like niches within the Automaton where now the brain, eyes, lungs, heart, and vitals are stored!!! The creature rises only to do its masters bidding with vague recollections of its former existence!

You are on fire today!

mabon5127 · 10/08/2018 7:38 am

Chainsaw wrote:
mabon5127 wrote:
Chainsaw wrote:
. I probably wouldn't let it work on an Iron Automaton either, for example, even though the automaton might be stylized to have eyes and be able to target with weapons.
Though in true Sword and Sorcery fashion a sacrifice would have to be made and the fresh organs be placed within canopic like niches within the Automaton where now the brain, eyes, lungs, heart, and vitals are stored!!! The creature rises only to do its masters bidding with vague recollections of its former existence!
You are on fire today!

Hahahaha! This too shall pass. I feel a nap coming on.

Chainsaw · 10/08/2018 7:42 am

Not to belabor it, Morgan, but I suppose under your intepretation, skeletons (and automatons) wouldn't be able to "see" those under Invisibility effects either, correct? I have historically taken more of a supernatural "sense-the-living" approach, which would have ignored Invisibility.