Watchdog spell and "hostile intent"

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

any physical thing crossing it's boundary

Bird poo? Pollen? Ants? Beetles? Molecules of nitrogen? Photons? Neutrinos? Worms, except for the purple ones? Insects, except for acid ants, Meganisoptera, draft beetles, giant dragonflies, carriage ants, armadects, howler wasps, giant soldier ants, banelings, giant odorous ants, sporeback beetles, spider eaters, clockroaches... wait, what edition was this again?

Trying to be hyper-literal and pre-defined without interpretation is usually more trouble that just letting the GM interpret things, without any more actual success. (If your GM is hostile enough that you can't trust them to be fair and reasonable, then you're not going to bind them with sufficient legalese and a few hundred pages of detailed, specific exceptions anyway.)

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

I've got very similar rules for the same reasons.

As worded, Watchdog is potentially a very powerful "detect treachery" spell. If one of your traveling companions eventually intends to lead you into an ambush, a strict reading of the spell RAW would have Watchdog go off every time they cross the boundary. .

No unless they are crossing the boundary as part of their plan to lead you into an ambush. The hostile intent has to be relevant to them entering the area. As far as detecting disloyalty goes, Sense Foes fits the bill already. Watchdog is intended to be a magical burglar alarm that will rouse you from sleep, not to detect long term sinister schemes.

[RGTraynor]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Trying to be hyper-literal and pre-defined without interpretation is usually more trouble that just letting the GM interpret things, without any more actual success. (If your GM is hostile enough that you can't trust them to be fair and reasonable, then you're not going to bind them with sufficient legalese and a few hundred pages of detailed, specific exceptions anyway.)

Quite. While my formal vote's with Varyon's #1, my sentiment is with Fred -- you just have to trust the GM to make interpretations, and if you can't, vote with your feet.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by RGTraynor

Quite. While my formal vote's with Varyon's #1, my sentiment is with Fred -- you just have to trust the GM to make interpretations, and if you can't, vote with your feet.

I feel I should note my #1 is basically the same a Fred's suggestion, just with a suggestion on how to handle the situation if the target attacking the party or not will come down to a Reaction Roll. Yes, it requires the GM to be trustworthy, but then an untrustworthy GM is something no set of rules can make not be problematic (and if someone managed to write a system that somehow did reign in such GM's... such GM's would never run a game in that system).

[Stormcrow]

What does the player think it does? Is that reasonable? If so, then that's what the GM should have it do. Everyone's happy.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

What does the player think it does? Is that reasonable? If so, then that's what the GM should have it do. Everyone's happy.

Or at least have the GM tell the player what the GM thinks it does. That way the player will be warned when the GM really doesn't want the player to cast that spell.

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Bird poo? Pollen? Ants? Beetles? Molecules of nitrogen? Photons? Neutrinos? Worms, except for the purple ones? Insects, except for acid ants, Meganisoptera, draft beetles, giant dragonflies, carriage ants, armadects, howler wasps, giant soldier ants, banelings, giant odorous ants, sporeback beetles, spider eaters, clockroaches... wait, what edition was this again?

Tes. You did notice the clause about being able to set exclusions right?

Trying to be hyper-literal and pre-defined without interpretation is usually more trouble that just letting the GM interpret things...

I found this spell caused too many arguments, not due to "poor GM interpretation" but due to "poor Player reading skills".

The event that triggered this change was that the party was ambushed by enemies firing into their camp, at night, from outside the boundary of the Watchdog spell. The Player who cast Watchdog thought it should detect the arrows and stones raining down on them...

I told him to reread the spell, he did and still argued it. The group then decided it was a 'kinda rubbish spell if it can't alert the caster to this type of ambush".

So I thought about it between games, suggested the alternative which couldn't read minds (I was never a fan of the reading minds version anyway†) and we implemented it with the change that 'Information" spells could be "cast along with it to make it better".


† It requires no 'reading minds' spells as prereqs, it goes from Danger Sense to Watchdog, so from "immediate danger" to "hostile intent" - which doesn't have to be immediate, and yes I've heard‡ the wailings of "If they were intending to steal from us when we came out of the dungeon, the Watchdog should have triggered on them days ago when they had to come and go from the camp!" So, yes, in my opinion it is a bit of a <S>rubbish</S> way too powerful spell for as cheaply acquired as it is.

‡ In fact, I believe I was one of the one making those type of arguments at one point, on the "preusage" side though, I like to argue out how vaguely worded spells worked in advance and "checking our hirelings against thieves and cut-throats" was an interesting use to me early on. I recall that GM deciding that "no, it detects things coming into camp to attack/steal from/etc you" that I decided the spell was pretty useless. If it can't alert us to an ogre bumbling across us while we sleep - and then becoming hostile - it's a second rate spell, roughly as useful as a string of bells. Or it needs to be cast discretely, over and over, defining 1 hex areas, so the bumbling enemies will be detected when they turn hostile... and the GM (and Player) in me hates that idea just as much.

Also, I just like allowing it to also be automatically 'linked' to Sound spells so it can alert others, not just the Wizard.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by StevenH

The Watchdog spell triggers when someone crosses the border with hostile intent.

But what happens if someone crosses it who is just minding their own business, with no clue there is someone nearby? If they would attack when they discover the caster is there, then I think it would trigger.

But what happens if the person would run away if they discovered someone there? Would that be considered "hostile"? And would the Watchdog trigger, or ignore the hapless intruder?

If someone would attack or rob people who are sleeping or camping, they sure have hostile intent! If they would not attack or steal even if they seemed to have an advantage, that does not sound like hostile intent.

Another interpretation would be based on their intentions at the moment they crossed the line. In that case, if Joe the Cannibal stumbles over your camp, it does not trigger, even if he is hungry. But if the patrol from Gilder chasing you stumbles over the camp, it probably would, because they are hostile to you, they just did not know where you were.

Its spirits. They have their own understanding of things. Tell your players to complain to the ineffiable magical forces if they don't like how those forces interpret things. Require a skill roll if they have questions about the details of how the spell works.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

I recall that GM deciding that "no, it detects things coming into camp to attack/steal from/etc you" that I decided the spell was pretty useless. If it can't alert us to an ogre bumbling across us while we sleep - and then becoming hostile - it's a second rate spell, roughly as useful as a string of bells. Or it needs to be cast discretely, over and over, defining 1 hex areas, so the bumbling enemies will be detected when they turn hostile... and the GM (and Player) in me hates that idea just as much.

A string of bells is easy to avoid and may not wake you immediately. And its very unlikely that you are so well hidden that nobody can see you until they are within the radius of a GURPS spell (unless you are camping in a wood or a thick jungle or something like that).

[Purple Snit]

It states that it alerts to "anyone or anyyhing crossing with hostile intent". Intentions after crossing don't matter, so an intruder who startles and attacks won't trigger it.
Arrows from afar don't have "intent", they are inanimate objects; the people firing them have intent, but didn't cross it.
It isn't an omnipotent panacea against getting attacked while sleeping, it's intended like an alarm on your house, which won't pick up an intruder in the yard, only one who enters.
It's also "magic", so it works in magical ways, which aren't often logical ones.
If they want more security, post a watch, or get a dog. But there's no perfect protection against danger, which is as it should be.