Mythic Black Tentacles vs. Freedom of Movement (pathfinder 1)

My group has a question about Mythic Black Tentacles vs. Freedom of Movement. For reference:

The important parts…

From Black Tentacles:

The tentacles can grapple creatures that are immune to grappling if that immunity is from a non-mythic source, but combat maneuver checks to grapple such creatures take a –5 penalty.

Freedom of Movement, broken down apart by me:

Point 1: All combat maneuver checks made to grapple the target automatically fail.

Point 2: The subject automatically succeeds on any combat maneuver checks and Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin.

Our current thought is that if someone has FoM up and they’re hit with Mythic Black Tentacles, they can be grappled, because the text of MBT overrides Part1 from FoM.

But then, on their turn, they can automatically escape because of Point 2 from FoM.

Does anyone else have this in play? What do you do?

Thanks in advance.

Player abusing narrative freedom

I’m running a play-by-post homebrew game. The game is narrative-driven, so naturally I allow players to make up their own races, backstories, abilities etc., as long as they “don’t overdo it” (as I put it).

The problem is one player who doesn’t seem to get what “overdoing it” means. At first he wanted to make his player an all-out superhero, and I had to talk him down from it. This was no easy task. This guy is well-meaning, but he doesn’t seem to realize that this isn’t a single-player power fantasy.

I tried explaining to him that he would outshine the other players, and completely derail my plots, not to mention that the theme of my world is being tossed out the window.

My reasoning seemed to help at first, but now he want his character to be a god.
Literally. In a gritty, post-apocalyptic cyberpunk setting.

Part of the problem is that he’s not even asking; he’s building his own world, and just keeping me updated.

This puts me in an uncomfortable situation where I have to either bluntly veto his posts (and there sure are a lot of those…) or start negotiating with him.

He really means well, and I don’t want to hurt his feelings, but I can’t let him keep this up.

So… any elegant way to put him in place?


I’m the sole GM.
There are 5 other players.
We are not part of another community.
It’s a forum, with major updates about once every two weeks with smaller updates in between.
I’m basically in command, but I announced from the start that players have freedom even to determine minor outcomes of their actions.

Is Shadow Pin intended to be prevented by Freedom of Movement?

I know, Rules-as-Intended questions are hard, but it has been estabilished that Freedom of Movement RAW is a mess and we don’t know what it stops exactly (relevant 3.5e question, but applicable to Pathfinder 1e as far as I know).

Moreover, maneuvers do not exist in regular Pathfinder 1e and it’s understandable that a core PF spell makes no special note about them.

I think the only possible way to know how they interact is to ask for author intent. Luckily, one of the authors often answers questions here on RPG.SE

Shadow Pin is a really good counter, it stops melee characters from charging and getting near in general, it stops recurring NPCs from teleporting away. No wonder one of my players took it.

The Freedom of Movement spell is meant to counter movement-blocking effects, but it only explicitly mentions making the recipient immune to mundane and magic impediments (emphasis mine):

This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move […] normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement

Food for thought: It’s magic, not “spells”. Is “supernatural” magical enough to be included, given that it goes away in an antimagic field?

Was Shadow Pin intended to bypass Freedom of Movement effects, or to be stopped by it?

(Since, as it is usually assumed, Freedom of Movement only helps with physical movement impairments, is the answer different for the teleportation part?)

Is Freedom of Movement hampered from actually working to escape a grapple?

The 5e D&D spell Freedom of Movement says:

The target can also spend 5 feet of movement to automatically escape from nonmagical restraints, such as manacles or a creature that has it grappled.

But, the grappled condition sets a grappled creature’s speed to 0. therefore, by the rules as written, doesn’t she or he have no movement to spend?

Is there some rule where you can “spend” from your normal base speed even when it is temporarily reduced? Or is this just one of those cases where we all shrug and go “eh, it is obvious what was meant”?

Does Freedom of Movement allow one to use their Fly speed Underwater?

Our party is about to have a water battle next session and we plan to cast Fly and Freedom of Movement on a few of our party members to deal with a Blue Dragon attacking the ship.

My question is whether someone affected by both spells is able to use their Fly speed Underwater since the effects of Freedom of Movement states that swimming imposes no penalties to movement and attacks while benefiting from the spell.

I can’t find anything that says I can or can’t so I’m wondering which way to lean on this. Any advice is appreciated.

Creating a “6 finger” guitar – reference request on how to create a UI for a guitar that supports more than 5 degrees of freedom

There have been a lot of developments in guitar to stretch the capabilities of the instrument from amps, pedals, multi-string approaches, fretless microtonal varieties, etc…

Fundamentally it seems there is a limitation the majority of humans face which is that there are usually only 5 fingers on their hand touching the neck of the guitar from which to form chords.

Has there been any research done on how to easily, and smoothly give a higher number of degrees of freedom for picking specific notes other than fingers pushing down on strings?

Some ideas I had:

  1. Engage other muscles, say the toe by standing on a pad which tries to map different toe configurations to certain pre-programmed chords, or individual strings

  2. BCI: theoretically we could forego any human limitations if we can engage the brain directly

My Question Concretely:

What are some documents about this topic/and or does anyone know of a canonical solution that has been created?

Manual 50 Backlink Indexing Service (The Freedom Strategy) for $8

Make your backlinks great again by indexing & Powerup on Do you dream about instant indexation in Google with ZERO efforts? If yes then you are at the right place. This is a manual backlink indexing service at an affordable cost… We have 3 years of experience in creating backlinks and indexing them. Our Manual indexing method will not only index links it also powerup your backlink by link juice. This will be 100% safe because we are not using any indexer software. Even premium indexers will not give you a good index rate. Our Instant Indexing Rate Is 60% + (and 15-30 days Indexing Rate Is 90% +) Our TAT is 7 days for 50 links. (for staying safe we make the sure drip feed for 7 days you can increase it for 12 days to looks more naturally at no extra cost) NOTE: if your backlink is not under the google filters your backlinks will appear in Google’s search index instantly.Web 2.0 Indexing depends on content quality also (google filters).In most cases, links can take more than 30 days to index.But our experience of 3 YEARS We have indexed very low-quality spin content In 7 minutes. We accept Profile & Web 2.0 Backlinks. So do not wait for making your backlinks great again…

by: abnos
Created: —
Category: Link Building
Viewed: 194

Can Freedom of Movement counter Aberrant Ground?

The Freedom of Movement spell states this in it’s description:

For the Duration, the target’s Movement is unaffected by difficult terrain, and Spells and other magical Effects can neither reduce the target’s speed nor cause the target to be Paralyzed or Restrained.

A Gibbering Mouther has an ability called Abberant Ground which states this:

The ground in a 10-foot radius around the mouther is doughlike difficult terrain. Each creature that starts its turn in that area must succeed on a DC 10 Strength saving throw or have its speed reduced to 0 until the start of its next turn.

That ability doesn’t appear to be magical. Does that mean that Freedom of Movement won’t stop a creature from being reduced to 0 speed if they fail their strength saving throw?

How does Freedom of Movement interact with the “Move” action while grappling?

The question requires a two-part answer:

  1. Does a character affected by Freedom of Movement need to make a successful grapple check to use the Move action, or would success be automatic?
  2. If successfully using the Move action, is a character affected by freedom of movement able to move the grapple by its full movement speed or only half?

You can move half your speed (bringing all others engaged in the grapple with you) by winning an opposed grapple check. This requires a standard action, and you must beat all the other individual check results to move the grapple.

Note: You get a +4 bonus on your grapple check to move a pinned opponent, but only if no one else is involved in the grapple.

The main issue to consider is how the Freedom of Movement effect works on the other characters in the grapple. Is the only bonus granted in a grapple the ability to simply leave the grapple whenever desired, or does it work more like encumbrance reduction and allow the character to move at full speed (dragging others along) when it would otherwise be unable to do so?

Does the Freedom of Movement spell prevent petrification by the Flesh to Stone spell?

Among other things, the Freedom of Movement spell prevents an affected creature from being restrained by spell effects:

For the duration, the target’s movement is unaffected by difficult terrain, and spells and other magical effects can neither reduce the target’s speed nor cause the target to be paralyzed or restrained.

The Flesh to Stone spell initially restrains a creature, and then, if the creature fails enough saving throws, petrifies it:

You attempt to turn one creature that you can see within range into stone. If the target’s body is made of flesh, the creature must make a Constitution saving throw. On a failed save, it is restrained as its flesh begins to harden. On a successful save, the creature isn’t affected.

A creature restrained by this spell must make another Constitution saving throw at the end of each of its turns. If it successfully saves against this spell three times, the spell ends. If it fails its saves three times, it is turned to stone and subjected to the petrified condition for the duration. The successes and failures don’t need to be consecutive; keep track of both until the target collects three of a kind.

Clearly, the restraining effect of Flesh to Stone would be prevented by Freedom of Movement. However, can the creature still be petrified if they fail enough saving throws, or does preventing the restraining effect end the Flesh to Stone spell, or prevent it from having any effect?