# Nothing is immune to daze?



## Ovinomancer (May 24, 2005)

Maybe this has been hashed out before, but it has just come to my attention that no creature is naturally immune to daze(the condition, not the spell).  Not constructs, not undead, nothing.  Immune to stunning, but not daze.  I find that odd.


----------



## andargor (May 24, 2005)

Ovinomancer said:
			
		

> Maybe this has been hashed out before, but it has just come to my attention that no creature is naturally immune to daze(the condition, not the spell).  Not constructs, not undead, nothing.  Immune to stunning, but not daze.  I find that odd.




The condition itself does not mention it, but the _daze_ spell is Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]. The effect as listed in the text is similar to the condition, hence the dazed condition can be inferred as being mind-affecting.

Several types would therefore be immune to being dazed: constructs, oozes, plants, and other mindless creatures (most undead, most vermin and swarms).

Andargor


----------



## Nail (May 24, 2005)

andargor said:
			
		

> ....the dazed condition can be inferred as being mind-affecting.



That seems a bit weak.


----------



## werk (May 24, 2005)

under construct:
Immunity to all *mind-affecting effects* (charms, *compulsions*, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects). 

so...

Daze
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]

but not...

Blasphemy
Evocation [Evil, Sonic]

So, some types are immune to some of the spells that causes daze.


----------



## andargor (May 24, 2005)

Nail said:
			
		

> That seems a bit weak.




Like my coffee this morning? Perhaps. 

Andargor


----------



## diaglo (May 24, 2005)

daze has as its implied concept...no action.

actions mean something in D&D. whether the action is an attack action or a move action

so basically anything that can move or attack... can be caused to stop moving or attacking.

the mechanic is just that... a way to stop the creature.

perhaps it is a construct or ooze or plant or ... anything that can perform an action


----------



## Shallown (May 24, 2005)

Can a "dazed" monster make Attacks of opportunity since it cannot take actions?


----------



## Shin Okada (May 24, 2005)

Shallown said:
			
		

> Can a "dazed" monster make Attacks of opportunity since it cannot take actions?




Some may say by the RAW a dazed creature can make AoA for that reason. But if so, a helpless creature can do the same. So I don't get that interpretation.


----------



## diaglo (May 24, 2005)

Shallown said:
			
		

> Can a "dazed" monster make Attacks of opportunity since it cannot take actions?



if you can't perform an attack action... i don't think you threaten.

ergo... no AoO.


----------



## Nail (May 24, 2005)

andargor said:
			
		

> Like my coffee this morning? Perhaps.



Mmmmmmm.....coffee.....


----------



## Nail (May 24, 2005)

diaglo said:
			
		

> if you can't perform an attack action... i don't think you threaten.
> 
> ergo... no AoO.



Oooooo.....don't let Hypersmurf see you post that.


----------



## diaglo (May 24, 2005)

Nail said:
			
		

> Oooooo.....don't let Hypersmurf see you post that.



 

i like to provoke him.

besides i don't have to read his responses.....


----------



## DreamChaser (May 24, 2005)

really guys and gals, everyone knows that dazed, stunned, sleeping, dying, and dead creatures can make reflex saves and take AoOs because neither of them are actions.  Just make sure you sleep or die with a melee weapon in your hand (monks rock even more now).

Why is there so much resistance to this eminently logical and reasonable rule?    

DC


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (May 25, 2005)

Well, part of the reason there's "resistance" to the idea that dazed creatures can't make reflex saves or take AoOs is that it's neither eminently logical, reasonable, nor a rule.

Lumping dazed, stunned, sleeping, dying, and dead together to make a point also doesn't work at all. Dazed is a lot closer to hasted or flying than dead if you want to talk conditions. If you were to run through the whole continuum, it might look something like this:

hasted: one extra attack
normal
sickened: penalties
slowed: partial actions only
nauseated: partial actions only
dazed: no actions
flatfooted: no actions, no dex bonus
stunned: no actions, no dex bonus, +2 to hit you, drop what you are holding, cease to threaten an area, etc.
helpless; no actions, can be coup de graced, dex treated as if 0, etc

And even that continuum doesn't really work for conditions. For instance, it's not clear where shaken, frightened, and panicked would fit in.

So, the argument that dazed is a negative condition and some other negative conditions prevent the character from taking AoOs therefore dazed characters can't take AoOs or make reflex saves doesn't work.

According to a literal interpretation of the rules, AoOs are not actions therefore a dazed creature is not prevented from making them. This gains some support from the fact that flatfooted creatures may not take actions either but can, under some conditions (specifically--if they have combat reflexes), take AoOs. I don't see any problem with this.


----------



## diaglo (May 25, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> under some conditions (specifically--if they have combat reflexes), take AoOs. I don't see any problem with this.




but combat reflexes and such are exceptions to the rule. they even state how they work as exceptions.


kinda like improved sunder or improved grapple avoiding AoO... and then the victim takes another feat to overcome the improved feat...


----------



## glass (May 25, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> Well, part of the reason there's "resistance" to the idea that dazed creatures can't make reflex saves or take AoOs is that it's neither eminently logical, reasonable, nor a rule.




Elder-Basilisk, may I introduce you to sarcasm?   


glass.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (May 26, 2005)

Sure, they're esceptions to the rule that flatfooted characters may not takes attacks of opportunity. However, such exceptions mean there's a lot of room to doubt that there is any such general rule as "characters who cannot take actions for any reason cannot take attacks of opportunity."

As far as I can tell, the inability to take AoOs is explicitly called out in the description of stunned and flatfooted and is not mentioned at all in the description of dazed. That would seem to imply to me that the various non-helpless conditions--such as dazed--still allow AoOs unless they are explicitly disallowed.



			
				diaglo said:
			
		

> but combat reflexes and such are exceptions to the rule. they even state how they work as exceptions.
> 
> 
> kinda like improved sunder or improved grapple avoiding AoO... and then the victim takes another feat to overcome the improved feat...


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (May 26, 2005)

No, you may not....



			
				glass said:
			
		

> Elder-Basilisk, may I introduce you to sarcasm?
> 
> 
> glass.













We're actually quite well acquainted.


----------



## Shin Okada (May 26, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> Sure, they're esceptions to the rule that flatfooted characters may not takes attacks of opportunity. However, such exceptions mean there's a lot of room to doubt that there is any such general rule as "characters who cannot take actions for any reason cannot take attacks of opportunity."
> 
> As far as I can tell, the inability to take AoOs is explicitly called out in the description of stunned and flatfooted and is not mentioned at all in the description of dazed. That would seem to imply to me that the various non-helpless conditions--such as dazed--still allow AoOs unless they are explicitly disallowed.




The problem is, "Dead", "Helpless", "Petrified" & "Unconscious" entries in DMG condition summary say nothing about AoOs, too.


----------



## Goolpsy (May 26, 2005)

Daze cant be a problem.. im not sure, but doesn't the describtion say, that it has to be a humanoid with no more than 5 hit dice??

You could make a stronger version though.. and that might be worth debating


----------



## Shallown (May 26, 2005)

Actually Goolspy you can be dazed by several other things just not the spell.

This question comes up from the spell shadow binding in the Complete arcane that on a failed will save _dazes _ for one round then entangles.

I don't much care about the AofO I was just wondering since it is an action defined as a single melee attack, unfortunately AofO don't say what type of action they are and on the actions chart the do not appear even though there is a no-action section that it could be in if it was a no action. I just think a single melee attack is an action. the RAW doesn't say that I know of.

Later


----------

