|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Dec 25, 2022 11:56:29 GMT -6
The spell explanation reads, "If a Magic-User goes insane, he will remain so for a number of weeks equal to the number of the plane he was attempting to contact ...."
How do you read, "he was attempting to contact?"
The Wizard ...
(a) never got answers (or was unable to ask questions) before becoming completely incapacitated?
(b) got answers but became completely incapacitated before being able to convey those answers to anyone?
(c) got answers and conveyed them before becoming completely incapacitated insane?
(d) something else?
|
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Dec 26, 2022 1:34:08 GMT -6
The wizard gets answers, but they're so overwhelming that the caster's mind is not only incapable of understanding the answers, but goes insane while processing the images/sounds/feelings conveyed by whatever answered. I might allow a wizard player to later dig into their own crazy memories and try to make sense of it, or go insane again trying. Might be an interesting adventure idea: The wizard manages to expel the memories into a pocket dimension outside of their own head, and the party can go in and try to decipher the clues they can gain from this crazy world. And mess up some childhood memories, too  |
|
|
|
Post by delta on Feb 21, 2023 21:59:15 GMT -6
I tend to let AD&D be a guide if it has a clarification on an issue like this. Text in PHB there says, "Insanity will strike as soon as 1 question is asked." So I play as per "Never got answers".
|
|
|
|
Post by chicagowiz on Feb 23, 2023 7:16:22 GMT -6
I tend to let AD&D be a guide if it has a clarification on an issue like this. Text in PHB there says, "Insanity will strike as soon as 1 question is asked." So I play as per "Never got answers". I would play it as a combo of your approach and hamurai's approach... insanity as soon as the question is asked but that's because of the overwhelming overload of information coming at them - some of which may or may not relate to what the MU wanted to know about and possibly could feed adventures later in the campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by delta on Feb 25, 2023 0:17:21 GMT -6
^ It's definitely a cool interpretation. :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Feb 28, 2023 13:47:15 GMT -6
An “Attempt” means you tried and failed. For example, an “assault” is an attempted “battery”.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Feb 28, 2023 17:39:46 GMT -6
An “Attempt” means you tried and failed. For example, an “assault” is an attempted “battery”. Agreed it can be used to imply failure, and is often used that way. Can it be used without reference to result or even imply success? One might remember hearing, "he had to try to succeed," for example. So the question is, does "attempt/try" necessarily imply/predicate (1a) a result, if so (1b) can it be any result, or (2) is it allowed to "hang unresolved," so to speak. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Feb 28, 2023 20:57:35 GMT -6
An “Attempt” means you tried and failed. For example, an “assault” is an attempted “battery”. Not true on both accounts. It's pretty common to hear that someone succeeded at something on their first attempt. Or if someone says that it took X number of attempts to succeed at something, that means they succeeded the Xth time, not that they failed X times and then had to do it an additional time after those attempts. As for assault, no attempt at battery is necessary. Brandishing a gun at someone threateningly is still assault even if no shots are fired. It's also totally possible to be charged with both assault and battery simultaneously. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Mar 1, 2023 7:31:55 GMT -6
An “Attempt” means you tried and failed. For example, an “assault” is an attempted “battery”. Not true on both accounts. It's pretty common to hear that someone succeeded at something on their first attempt. Or if someone says that it took X number of attempts to succeed at something, that means they succeeded the Xth time, not that they failed X times and then had to do it an additional time after those attempts. As for assault, no attempt at battery is necessary. Brandishing a gun at someone threateningly is still assault even if no shots are fired. It's also totally possible to be charged with both assault and battery simultaneously. “It's pretty common to hear that someone succeeded at something on their first attempt”. I agree that it’s common to hear this idiom. But I was breaking it down into logical parts. The attempt and the success are not one and the same. And in OD&D, a partial success at casting the spell is no “success” at all. Especially if you “go insane”. My legal example: Please allow me to be more specific. I was not referring to criminal law. I was referring to the common law torts. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Mar 1, 2023 7:43:19 GMT -6
An “Attempt” means you tried and failed. For example, an “assault” is an attempted “battery”. Agreed it can be used to imply failure, and is often used that way. Can it be used without reference to result or even imply success? One might remember hearing, "he had to try to succeed," for example. So the question is, does "attempt/try" necessarily imply/predicate (1a) a result, if so (1b) can it be any result, or (2) is it allowed to "hang unresolved," so to speak. All of these are very good questions. My initial ruling would be the first option above. But a player might convince me to give them a die roll for other options. Referees can be flexible. |
|
