Talk:Measure of Character (3.5e Spell)

Ratings
== Curse Examples ==

Petrification, unaging slumber, and death seem like they wouldn't be equivalent in power to the effects of bestow curse. --Foxwarrior (talk) 05:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * That's because you only get that while casting it as a 7th level spell. You gain additional benefits beyond bestow curse, those benefits. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 05:57, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Two spell levels to make it affect a lot of people in a 1 mile radius and drastically increase the strength of the effect? --Foxwarrior (talk) 06:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Well.... yeah. Thats the idea. Remember though, the increase in strength is on the "punishment" part, and you can't have your punishment make completing the removal condition impossible.  So really, the once that are killers can only be reasonably placed at the end of a time limit, otherwise it violates the other parts of the spells.  You can't temporarly die (though amusingly you CAN temporarly be petrified). -- Eiji-kun (talk) 06:34, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * So this is why illegitimate children are so terrible. Get one unlucky bastard, convince him that he should never, ever jump up and down three times (dominate person should help here, but there are many other more situational ways), and then measure of character him to jump up and down three times. Voila, the (arbitrarily high-level) king has fallen into an ageless slumber, from which he cannot wake.
 * If arbitrarily high-level kings seem too specific, elder brains must do. --Foxwarrior (talk) 06:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Heh, it doesn't quite work. You've compelled the kid to do something, he hasn't done it himself.  Though, I suppose a compulsion clause wouldn't hurt.  I'll find a place to put it in.


 * The king gets a save (the spell is affecting him) and an ageless slumber which isn't temporary would have to be something at the end of a time limit (because remember, they must have a reasonable chance to cancel the spell before the time limit hits). But for arguement's sake let's say the time limit is pretty short due to an easy task.  "Eat this donut in my hand." and proceed to play keep away.  He has a chance, but botches all his rolls and doesn't get the donut and falls asleep.  If the king also failed the save, then yes, the king would be asleep.  That's why the spell has to be at least 7th.  I find this acceptable because you could hold hostage a whole city.  At this level you can also hold hostage a city via a vis Control Weather, so 13th level and above is when you start getting into city-changing effects.


 * At that point, the only way to lift the curse, besides get a god to do it, is finding the caster and getting him to dismiss the spell. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 07:11, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * "They are all subject to the curse, which isn't fair for them but is usually used to "encourage" the target to do it for the sake of friends and family." Are you saying that every family member gets to do something to avoid their own personal misfortune? If not, remember that the bastard is the primary target, not the king. --Foxwarrior (talk) 07:26, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * No, I'm saying they all get saves. Their quest, if they fail, is still "Get Prince Buttpants to be nice to people." -- Eiji-kun (talk) 07:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

This Spell Is Pointless
You don't actually need it in order to represent those scenes. Just asking people to do things nonmagically, and then casting spells on them when they fail to comply is more true to the source material, and entirely possible already. That has the added benefit of not having the people use Spellcraft on you. --Foxwarrior (talk) 06:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, true. Though, this is a spell that covers more specifically the tropes involved.  It could also be Serious/Mass Bestow Curse the spell, and do as you said there.  However, this is a non-combat spell, because you need to have at least a minute of interaction to prepare the spell.  I did it specifically to remove the ability for this to be a combat spell that you just choose to cast just whenever.


 * Spellcraft's use is not an issue or unintended. Though, it can only be used when the spell is actually being cast (1 round casting).  The 1 minute thing is a pre-requisite to casting.  Think of it like the Abstainance component of Exalted spells or the like.  In this case the component is "Got to try to make them do something for a minute".  The pre-requisite also allows for the modification of the saving throw Banishment style, making it much more certain (and more obvious) what is going on here. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 06:34, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Spellcraft currently appears to work, because "The actual casting time varies, as the casting is part of a task or request lasting anywhere from 1 minute to 8 hours."
 * Also, doesn't this spell make it just that much more of a bad idea to have reasonable conversations with casters? "Welp, you let the cleric try to convince you to convert to his religion for an hour, now you have no choice."--Foxwarrior (talk) 06:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Poor wording perhaps? I'll review it to match intent better.


 * Does it? Perhaps.  It's why I put the XP cost in to prevent spammability.  Yes, the caster could, but he'll have to pay for it.  An arguement that the XP cost needs to be higher/lower is viable.  1000 was chosen artbitarily as what feels like an expensive casting. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 07:11, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Talking for 60 minutes is only casting it once, I thought? And he doesn't even have to pay the cost at all if the spell fails? --Foxwarrior (talk) 07:26, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * He doesn't have to pay the cost if the spell fails due to unreasonable request, not due to a successful saving throw. I put that in there as a bit of security in case someone makes a reasonable request, but it's not actually reasonable due to (unknown factor here). What was that about 60 minutes? -- Eiji-kun (talk) 07:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * You were talking about preventing spammability, but you were responding to my assertion that "However, they take a -1 penalty for each 5 minutes the caster takes trying to convince the target to ceade to their request, to a maximum of -20 penalty after 100 minutes" means that you shouldn't let Clerics try to convince you of things through reasoned conversation. --Foxwarrior (talk) 07:46, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I am confused. We lost track somewhere...


 * But yes, don't let bitter clerics try and convince you through long conversations. If you see what his game is, you'll punch him in the nose during the 1 round he's open.  I'd consider it the same as talking to a person and then suddenly sleight of hand death attack!  Same concept, different weapon. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 08:00, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

7th and 9th slots
Why does it get both bonus effects and boosted range / targets? I mean, I'm all for Mass being a +2 level metamagic effect, but it seems a bit silly to give out both for +2 spell levels. I could see one or the other at 7, with similar either/or bits in the 9th slot, but the current formulation feels a bit weird. Don't get me wrong, I want 9th level spells to put whole castles into eternal unaging slumber, but a 17+ mile radius seems a lot excessive for that sort of magic. Want to explain the thoughts in that a bit Eiji (or just tweak it :-p)? - Tarkisflux Talk 07:24, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, you think it's too much as well? Alright, I'll re-review it.  I don't mind making it an either/or thing. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 07:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * If it helps, I think bestow curse is a rather weak 3 aside from its duration, and that makes this conditional removal bestow curse a pretty weak 5. So you could probably afford the "family range" thing in the base spell at 5 if you wanted, particularly since they all get saves anyway. Then you can put "1 mile kingdom + bestow curse" or "family + boosted effect" at 7, and "mile/level + bestow curse" or "1 mile kingdom + boosted effect" or "family + max effect" at 9. - Tarkisflux Talk 07:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Alright, I've made the changes. It's not an either/or thing.  At 9th, the range is capped to 10 miles (I'm trying to judge how wide a city might be).  And at 9th the penalty goes up anyway since its now greater bestow curse but doesn't include infinite torment, ageless sleep, or death.  Also, added "artifacts" as a cat's paw to cure it after the final punishment is applied, so a DM has more tools to use to remove it. (The changes were made before you post, but still short be valid.  Silly edit conflicts.) -- Eiji-kun (talk) 08:00, 20 December 2013 (UTC)