Does Freedom of Movement protect vs. Stun?

[phaedrusxy]

It seems pretty clear that it should to me, but then again the spell is worded so vaguely and open-ended that it could in theory protect against almost anything, including death...

[sirpercival]

Luckily, if someone hits you with an unwanted FoM and you want to be able to die, you can always IHS the FoM.

[Kethrian]

FoM is supposed to protect you against anything that restricts your movement.  Stun affects your actions, not your movement - you could still run around if you had the actions available to do so.  The same would apply to daze or nauseate.

[zugschef]

FoM is supposed to protect you against anything that restricts your movement.  Stun affects your actions, not your movement - you could still run around if you had the actions available to do so.  The same would apply to daze or nauseate.

actually stun lets you drop anything held... that sounds like restricting your movement.

[PipTheBlue]

By those criteria: the beating of your heart is a form of moving too. You are stunned: you die.

Edit 1: That is a bad case of abduction right there. Sorry, woke up too early for my standards. I think my position still stands from an intuitive point of view though

Edit 2: Come to think of it, it's abduction on you rpart as well, Zug. Hampering your motorfunctions is a means for you to drop anything in your hands. However, in the case of stunning you drop the items simply because your mind is set on other things. I would call it mind-affecting, not hampering movement.

[Kethrian]

If stun lets you drop anything held, then it's quite clearly un-restricting your movement.

But now I'm wondering how FoM would work with Dominate?

[kitep]

Does Freedom of Movement protect vs. Stun?

I was looking at the FAQ for something else, and this specific question was asked.  The answer is no.

    Does the freedom of movement spell protect a character
from being stunned? The argument is that “stun” is a
condition that hinders movement.

    Freedom of movement is one of those tricky spells that has
a lot of open-ended wording that might lead to confusion. The
spell becomes much more manageable if you just look at it as
something that ignores any physical impediment to movement
or actions. If you assign this restriction, then it makes sense that
freedom of movement works against solid fog, slow, and web;
each of these spells puts something in the way of the creature
that stops them from moving/acting, or specifically targets the
creature’s physical movement.
    With this interpretation, spells and effects such as hold
person that apply a mental impediment to taking any action
would not be bypassed by freedom of movement. These are
mental effects, and freedom of movement only helps you bypass
physical effects (such as solid fog) or effects that specifically
impede just your movement, not spells that stop you from
taking any action, as hold person does.
    In the same vein, freedom of movement would not work on
someone who had been turned to stone by a medusa’s gaze or
by a flesh to stone spell.
    To answer the original question, being stunned is one of
those mental effects and would normally deny a creature the
ability to act at all. Since it’s not specifically focused on just
impeding movement, and it is a mental, not physical
impediment, freedom of movement would not help a stunned
creature to act or move normally.
    This interpretation of freedom of movement can make it
easier to adjudicate the effects of the spell, but it is also more
restrictive. As always, it will ultimately be up to the Dungeon
Master to make the best call as he sees fit for his campaign and
play session.

[phaedrusxy]

Great. Thanks!

[Halinn]

The problem with that FAQ entry is that it goes explicitly against the text of the spell, which protects against paralysis. Hold Person is a paralysis effect, but the FAQ states that FOM won't protect against it.

[sirpercival]

The problem with that FAQ entry is that it goes explicitly against the text of the spell, which protects against paralysis. Hold Person is a paralysis effect, but the FAQ states that FOM won't protect against it.

Yeah, that's because of Hold Person being badly worded.  Paralysis in general is a physical thing, which doesn't prevent you from thinking and taking mental actions.  HP is a mental effect (since it's mind-affecting), which is why they say FoM doesn't affect it.  HP should say that you are "immobilized similar to paralysis, because your mind can't do anything blah blah blah".

[Halinn]

The problem with that FAQ entry is that it goes explicitly against the text of the spell, which protects against paralysis. Hold Person is a paralysis effect, but the FAQ states that FOM won't protect against it.

Yeah, that's because of Hold Person being badly worded.  Paralysis in general is a physical thing, which doesn't prevent you from thinking and taking mental actions.  HP is a mental effect (since it's mind-affecting), which is why they say FoM doesn't affect it.  HP should say that you are "immobilized similar to paralysis, because your mind can't do anything blah blah blah".

But FOM doesn't specify physical stuff at all, and in the examples of magic that would impede movement, they mention paralysis, which only few spells can cause in core (blasphemy-likes, ghoul touch and the hold X spells). Why should paralysis from Hold Person be different from Ghoul Touch, with regards to Freedom of Movement?

[phaedrusxy]

Paralyzed

A paralyzed character is frozen in place and unable to move or act. A paralyzed character has effective Dexterity and Strength scores of 0 and is helpless, but can take purely mental actions. A winged creature flying in the air at the time that it becomes paralyzed cannot flap its wings and falls. A paralyzed swimmer can’t swim and may drown. A creature can move through a space occupied by a paralyzed creature—ally or not. Each square occupied by a paralyzed creature, however, counts as 2 squares.

That's why. Being stunned prevents mental actions. Paralysis, despite being mind-affecting, doesn't actually affect your mind itself. It just prevents your mind from causing your body to move.

[Halinn]

Paralyzed

A paralyzed character is frozen in place and unable to move or act. A paralyzed character has effective Dexterity and Strength scores of 0 and is helpless, but can take purely mental actions. A winged creature flying in the air at the time that it becomes paralyzed cannot flap its wings and falls. A paralyzed swimmer can’t swim and may drown. A creature can move through a space occupied by a paralyzed creature—ally or not. Each square occupied by a paralyzed creature, however, counts as 2 squares.

That's why. Being stunned prevents mental actions. Paralysis, despite being mind-affecting, doesn't actually affect your mind itself. It just prevents your mind from causing your body to move.

I have no preference either way with regards to stun, but I find the justification used in the FAQ to be weak, as that same FAQ claims that Freedom of Movement wouldn't stop Hold Person, one of the types of spells that is fairly explicitly stopped by FOM.

[PipTheBlue]

I see what you mean. It's a case of poor wording on FoM. It seems to protect you from any kind of paralyzation that's due to physical, external effects. It shouldn't prevent paralysation by mind-affecting effects. Likewise, it will not prevent you from being paralyzed when your Dex drops to 0.

[Halinn]

I see what you mean. It's a case of poor wording on FoM. It seems to protect you from any kind of paralyzation that's due to physical, external effects. It shouldn't prevent paralysation by mind-affecting effects. Likewise, it will not prevent you from being paralyzed when your Dex drops to 0.

Wait, what?

This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web. The subject automatically succeeds on any grapple check made to resist a grapple attempt, as well as on grapple checks or Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin.

The spell also allows the subject to move and attack normally while underwater, even with slashing weapons such as axes and swords or with bludgeoning weapons such as flails, hammers, and maces, provided that the weapon is wielded in the hand rather than hurled. The freedom of movement spell does not, however, allow water breathing.

What part of the text of the primary source suggests that the protection is only extended towards physical effects, when it explicitly calls out magic and the paralyzed condition?

[phaedrusxy]

I see what you mean. It's a case of poor wording on FoM. It seems to protect you from any kind of paralyzation that's due to physical, external effects. It shouldn't prevent paralysation by mind-affecting effects. Likewise, it will not prevent you from being paralyzed when your Dex drops to 0.

Wait, what?

This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web. The subject automatically succeeds on any grapple check made to resist a grapple attempt, as well as on grapple checks or Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin.

The spell also allows the subject to move and attack normally while underwater, even with slashing weapons such as axes and swords or with bludgeoning weapons such as flails, hammers, and maces, provided that the weapon is wielded in the hand rather than hurled. The freedom of movement spell does not, however, allow water breathing.

What part of the text of the primary source suggests that the protection is only extended towards physical effects, when it explicitly calls out magic and the paralyzed condition?

The paralyzed condition itself, basically. It doesn't prevent mental actions, so obviously it is only impeding physical actions, despite the [Mind Affecting] tag. Everything else described in FoM is something that physically impedes movement. So you can deduce that FoM only helps against things that impede your physical movement, but it isn't so clear and explicit in its wording.