Talk:Crawl Away Head (3.5e Spell)

Comments
Why can't they talk after the head drops? - Tarkisflux Talk 19:05, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It was meant to be a debuff to casters to prevent size abuse stuff. By the time 7th level spells roll around, this might be moot. Though, I'm still a bit hesitant to include it at this point. It appears to raise questions. Got any counterpoints for its removal? The intention of the spell was to have it be a situational buff or debuff. --Ganteka Future (talk) 19:10, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Seems to debuff everyone, casters and warriors alike. Heck, warriors moreso, since casters just take a -20%? penalty to spellcasting, and psions take no penalty at all. A warrior on the other hand is bereft of his weapon, magic items, and everything else he needs to survive in the forefront of battle. --Ghostwheel (talk) 19:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it debuffs everyone (unevenly at that). However, I'm sure that there would be situations out there where losing your body and being just a head might be useful in some (probably humorous) limited capacity. Fighty guys do get the short end of the deal here (being gear dependent). I'm not sure there's any way around that concept-wise though. At least they'll fail less with their higher Fort saves. Also, no voice means no spells with verbal components (unless you've got a way around that). The 20% thing I think you're thinking of would be for deafened characters. As for psionic characters, yeah it's basically just the -4 Con thing for them, which makes being a permanent crawl away head a risky option. Finally, does this appear to fit in with High level material or should it be categorized differently? Most of the counters are cheap/low-level and should be available before the spell takes full effect, when it becomes more of a nuisance to remove. If you've got suggestions, please let me know. --Ganteka Future (talk) 20:34, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I think removal of the no-talking thing is fine. As far as being a spellcaster debuff, it looks like it basically reduces you to V only spells if you can talk (no body for semantic components, very limited ability to manipulate material components) and that's fine. It's worse for thugs, though it's unclear if "previous biological functions" includes natural attacks or not so they might have a way around it. - Tarkisflux Talk 02:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Heh, all this time I figured the no talking thing was due to lack of lungs... -- Eiji-kun (talk) 02:09, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I can clarify manipulating limbs (something like "not fine enough control for somatic components or weapon use, maybe -4 to attacks or something"). I'll also clarify keeping natural weapons, as that was the intent, just so things don't get too complex with keeping bites but not slams or something. At least I don't have to worry about figuring out how vargouilles work (hint: they're outsiders, so whatever). Getting on it now. --Ganteka Future (talk) 02:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)