Altalazar said:
You say that so definitively - what is your reference for that? Is it in the DMG or in a Sage column?
My reference is common sense.
Let's assume for argument sake that is is not a damaging spell.
Three things can happen.
1) The caster can maintain control of the spell, even though a different spell took away that control and made him the target. Well, this is contradictory. Either Spell Turning took away control of the spell, or it did not. In fact, another element of the spell with can be modified is range (it can be turned, even though the original caster was at max range, effectively doubling the range). Plus, allowing original caster control would make Spell Turning effective against some spells which it should effect and not others.
This makes Spell Turning too wimpy against spells like Gaseous Form where if your spell is turned, you can turn it back off.
2) The character with Spell Turning takes control of the spell. This does not makes sense since Spell Turning does not explicitly call it out. It seems reasonable that if Spell Turning should give the turner control of the spell, not only would they have called it out, but there would be other instances of it in the game. No, this is a unique concept with no other occurrances (at least that I can think of).
If this taking of control means that it's just like you were the caster, then this makes Spell Turning too wimpy against spells like Shield Other where instead of being protected, he is actually the recipient of damage with no saving throw. And, it gives him a little too much power in the case of spells like Charm Person where the spell not only protected him, but gives him an influence over the original spell caster of the Charm Person spell.
3) Neither caster has control of the spell, so neither can quickly dismiss it. This makes the most sense. The Spell Turning screwed up the control. The Spell Turning spell in reality took over control, but since it is a spell and not a caster, it cannot do anything except let default effects take place.
So when it successfully turns Gaseous Form, the original caster cannot dismiss it.
When it successfully turns Charm Person, the original caster loves himself.
When it successfully turns Shield Other, the original caster sends half of the damage to himself.
In all of these cases, the character with the Spell Turning was protected, but he did not GAIN any additional benefit or INCUR any additional penalty due to the spell being turned. In other words, the turned spell does not affect him in any way. Bad things can only happen to the original spell caster.
In the case of damaging spells, the same applies with the exception that part of the damage is applied to each.
A different DM might rule differently, but this is what makes the most sense. A different DM might rule that Spell Turning only takes away the control of the target and no other control. But, this makes Spell Turning basically useless against a lot of non-damaging spell. A different DM might rule that Spell Turning gives all control to the protected character. But, this makes Spell Turning overly powerful against a lot of non-damaging spell. IMO.
Hypersmurf said:
It occured to me that it would be rather fun to cast Shield Other at someone wearing such a ring - if it took effect, you could just dismiss it, but if it were turned... ah, if it were turned, then half of all damage dealt to you is dealt to the person wearing the ring.
This is a cool idea, but it wouldn't quite work the way you intended.
Spell Turning does not change the recipient of the damage of Shield Other just like it does not make him the original spell caster or give him control of the spell. Spell Turning would merely change the odds on whom the recipient of the Shield Other spell would be (since this is a non-damaging spell).
So, if you cast this on an enemy, either he would be the target or you would be the target of the spell. If he is, you would be protecting him. If you are, then it is a wash since you would take all damage from any attack on yourself.
