HYPERBOREA » Sleep

Chainsaw · 11/22/2014 11:55 pm

Reading the Sleep spell description, it seems that you can cast sleep on an area out of view and have it affect creatures in that area - is that the correct by-the-book reading?

Ghul · 11/23/2014 12:21 am

Personally, I typically require the caster to see the desired target, even if it is an area of effect spell. But if that area of effect stretches beyond that which is caster can see, then sure. So, if the caster throws the spell 50 feet away, and the 30-foot diameter AoE stetches around a corner or whatnot, then some potential targets may be unseen.

Chainsaw · 11/23/2014 7:34 am

I ask because of what happened in our game recently. lige had just saved against a gorgon's petrifaction, so he alerted everyone as to the threat behind the corner. cadam had not actually seen her, but hoped he could cast Sleep to take her out given it's area of effect status. I wasn't sure, but I usually rule generously in game (balances out my mistakes) and then review the ruling later, nullifying the precedent if it proves undesirable in the bigger picture. So, I allowed it. Now I'm debating whether to reign that in or not.

capitalbill · 11/23/2014 9:03 am

Chainsaw wrote:
I ask because of what happened in our game recently. lige had just saved against a gorgon's petrifaction, so he alerted everyone as to the threat behind the corner. cadam had not actually seen her, but hoped he could cast Sleep to take her out given it's area of effect status. I wasn't sure, but I usually rule generously in game (balances out my mistakes) and then review the ruling later, nullifying the precedent if it proves undesirable in the bigger picture. So, I allowed it. Now I'm debating whether to reign that in or not.

That part of the session got a bit confusing with our convoluted scheming on how to take her out with the littlest risk, but I thought we tried that as his magic-user could see the target without having to gaze into her eyes- knowing the threat he would intentionally stare at her feet and still have a target for his spell. If his companion had just told him to not look at her face I woukd think there'd be little to no risk unless she laid down on the ground.

Chainsaw · 11/23/2014 9:41 am

Ahhhh, I totally missed that crucial detail, Bill. Makes sense now, no complaints on my end.

I suppose the question still stands - if the magic-user is aware of an enemy because a friend informs him, "I looked around the corner - six snake-men," but the magic-user hasn't actually seen the enemy himself, does the spell still work? I lean toward yes, but my conviction is low.

DMPrata · 11/23/2014 9:58 am

(moved to Sorcery sub-forum—Shazam!)

Personally, I would disallow a sorcerer casting a spell around a corner at an unseen target.

Chainsaw · 11/23/2014 10:47 am

It does seem to strengthen the spell considerably, perhaps beyond the bounds of intent. Maybe the magic-user could research a more powerful version.

Blackadder23 · 11/23/2014 11:06 am

DMPrata wrote:
Personally, I would disallow a sorcerer casting a spell around a corner at an unseen target.

I agree with Dave. Whether the target is a creature or an area, the sorcerer must be able to see it - either with his own eyes or some sort of scrying magic. If there were several creatures, some around the corner and some not, I would allow the sorcerer to hit the ones he could see with sleep and maybe catch the unseen ones in the AOE. But just to cast a sleep spell at thin air and get somebody around a corner - no. Something like a fireball that affects an area and only incidentally damages creatures - probably yes (presuming the center point of the fireball were visible to the caster). It's a fine line.

(BTW, my reading is that gorgons are immune to sleep BTB because they don't have "4 HD or less"; they have 4+4. But that may be a mental holdover from AD&D.)

Chainsaw · 11/23/2014 11:16 am

Blackadder23 wrote:
(BTW, my reading is that gorgons are immune to sleep BTB because they don't have "4 HD or less"; they have 4+4. But that may be a mental holdover from AD&D.)

I think so... the AS&SH Sleep description indicates to ignore the "+" and also that it can be focused on one creature to extend the HD affected up to 5 if desired.

Induces victims of 4 HD or fewer to slumber, with no saving throws possible. This enchantment encompasses a 30-foot-diameter area and affects 2d8 HD of creatures, starting with the lowest HD creatures first. Note that any “+” to hit dice should be ignored when determining the HD value of affected targets (e.g., a 3+1 HD creature counts as 3 HD, though a 3 HD creature is ensorcelled before a 3+1 HD creature). Alternatively, this spell can be targeted at a single creature of 5 HD or fewer. Sleeping victims will not awaken from normal noise, though they will if shaken or slapped. Undead and constructs are unaffected by this spell.

Blackadder23 · 11/23/2014 11:19 am

Yeah, I missed that bit about the "+". Makes the spell a bit more powerful in AS&SH.
(Not to mention that a medusa in AD&D has 6 HD and is unquestionably immune.)

Last edited by Blackadder23 (11/23/2014 11:21 am)

Chainsaw · 11/23/2014 11:25 am

Blackadder23 wrote:
Yeah, I missed that bit about the "+". Makes the spell a bit more powerful in AS&SH.
(Not to mention that a medusa in AD&D has 6 HD and is unquestionably immune.)

To be honest, my gut reaction was similar to yours - that it wouldn't work - but when I reviewed the spell description, I realized I was wrong. Should have used the Greater Gorgon!

Scalydemon · 12/04/2014 8:47 pm

Ok, heres where Scaly says stuff that may irk some folks

I hate the sleep spell and find it one of the lamest things about D&D.

What I think should happen is to come up with a spell that is somewhat similar in power/effect and substitute it. Maybe make a reduced form of lightning bolt a 1st level spell to give the poor wizard some power (That's probably magic missle so maybe thats not a good idea)..not sure...

Handy Haversack · 12/05/2014 11:21 am

Scaly, is it the mechanics of sleep you hate or the idea of magicians bothering with something as mundane as nap time?

Blackadder23 · 12/05/2014 11:41 am

Sleep seems very flavorful to me, especially compared to something truly mundane like magic missile. It also more closely resembles a "real" spell of myth and legend - for example, bearing a Hand of Glory was supposed to put everyone in a house to sleep (according to some versions of the tale). Looked at from a mechanical point of view, it also gives low level magician options beyond just inflicting damage (taking prisoners for example, or panicking superstitious types by appearing to "slay" a large number of their comrades with a few arcane words). Substituting another damage spell seems like a step backward to me. Just my opinion!

Ghul · 12/05/2014 4:58 pm

I love the various enchantment/charm spells alomst as much as I love necromancy and illusion/phantasm. The various evocations spells, while necessary, are less exciting to me. So, to each his own!

Scalydemon · 12/05/2014 8:37 pm

Yeah, just can't see a sorcerer in a pulp sword & sorcery novel or zine casting sleep on his foes etc and I see it as a corny nerf spell. I get that it is a D&D trope/stalwart though and people like it or are used to it.

To each his own though. I am certainly not one to tell people how to play a game or how to have their fun etc.

Game on! (or should I say ha ha

Scalydemon · 12/05/2014 10:05 pm

An add on thought on the broader topic of magic systems.

For me, the ideal magic system is one more akin to Stormbringer and Hawkmoon (Chaosium) as opposed to D&D based Vancian - especially when playing a sword & sorcery type game.

From what I understand tinkering with the mechanics of a game to personal taste is in general welcomed - so I hope no one takes offense to my personal opinion on this matter.

Hope that all people play the game that is the most fun for them.

Blackadder23 · 12/05/2014 11:22 pm

Scalydemon wrote:
Yeah, just can't see a sorcerer in a pulp sword & sorcery novel or zine casting sleep on his foes etc and I see it as a corny nerf spell.

That's interesting because I personally could easily see a pulp witch (for example) putting a whole room full of people to sleep so her minions could abduct a desired target. It's always refreshing to see how perspectives on the same material can differ from person to person.

Regardless, I don't see how anyone could take offense to your reasoned opinion.

rhialto · 12/06/2014 7:35 am

Scalydemon wrote:
An add on thought on the broader topic of magic systems.

For me, the ideal magic system is one more akin to Stormbringer and Hawkmoon (Chaosium) as opposed to D&D based Vancian - especially when playing a sword & sorcery type game.

I'll once more plug Akratic Wizardry and its variant magic rules: they work really well with AS&SH, and are similar to Stormbringer's feel.

Scalydemon · 12/09/2014 6:43 pm

rhialto wrote:
Scalydemon wrote:
An add on thought on the broader topic of magic systems.

For me, the ideal magic system is one more akin to Stormbringer and Hawkmoon (Chaosium) as opposed to D&D based Vancian - especially when playing a sword & sorcery type game.
I'll once more plug Akratic Wizardry and its variant magic rules: they work really well with AS&SH, and are similar to Stormbringer's feel.

Not familiar with Akratic Wizardry, do you have a link? Thanks