Control...

[Scott Adams]

*** Quoting cremis at MYRIAD.NET from a message to longshot ***

cr> Yes.  The victim is the caster's helpless pawn.  It's fairly clear
cr> that the spell does not just control the gross motor functions or
cr> charm the target.  It makesthe caster the most important thing in the
cr> world, for whom the victim would do anything.

     YEah and its a big abuse if used alot...takes the fun out of
interrogations via simple means :).

cr> The spell destroys the target's soul if maintained for too long.
cr> That seems a little extreme for what you are assuming is basically a
cr> simple charm.

     Makes sense really..since your taking the will from the person
slowly...because his will is under control their lose the power (like if you
lay in a bed for months you lose control of walking).

cr> There is a significant difference between the spells.  Once you have
cr> Controlled someone or something you will always have bonuses to
cr> Control them again (you have a 10 modifier on your spell success
cr> roll).  With Fascination there is no benefit for having Fascinated

I wonder if the authors didn't get the stuff from say vampire lore.  I mean you
see it in the movies similar situations.  They thrall someone enough they are
the pawn forever.  etc..etc...

cr> mana, instituting a house rule which requires eye contact for
cr> Fascination to be cast, and/or another which allows Control to
cr> continue on without destruction of the Soul.

yeah saw those rule variants...


~~~ Telegard v3.09.b15/mL


--
|Fidonet:  Scott Adams 1:112/91 at fidonet
|Internet: longshot at jax.fidonet.org
|
| Brought to you by the Net 112 Gateway.