|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Would banishment work on the incorporeal azata?
Incorporeal: Corporeal spells and effects that do not cause damage only have a 50% chance of affecting an incorporeal creature. Force spells and effects, such as from a magic missile, affect an incorporeal creature normally.
Banishment doesn't seem like a corporeal spell...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
AFAIK there's no game definition of "Corporeal Spell", much less a rule saying "corporeal creatures cast corporeal spells" (and incorporeal creatures cast incorporeal spells). So when we see the phrase 'corporeal spell' we are just left with the normal English meaning of 'corporeal':
Whether the caster themself is corporeal or not has no bearing on the spells they cast, an incorporeal creature may cast corporeal spells just as much as a corporeal creature, that depends on the spell description itself. Flaming Sphere or Stone Call are corporeal spells because they effect a physical presence in the world, Banishment or Teleportation are not corporeal. Regardless of the caster.
Bracers of Armor are based on the spell Mage Armor, a Force effect which explicitly works vs. Incorporeal creatures, the item emanates magic based on Conjuration just like the spell. Items based on spells don't always exactly replicate the spell itself, they can often diverge alot, but in this case the item isn't really doing anything 'inspired by the general theme of the spell', it's doing pretty much the exact thing mechanically, so IMHO it should work just like the spell... But the RAW isn't 100% clear even if all that supporting evidence suggests it should. So create another FAQ thread if you want.
Mind a quick derailing? Force effects have full effect on incorporeal creatures, from Magic Missile to Wall of Force... The question is, would Bracers of Armor provide their full benefit then against attacks from an incorporeal creature? The description states that it gives a 'Armor bonus' through a 'invisible but tangible field of force'.
Had one GM say it didn't, had another say it did, *shrug* that fight was months ago but curious on getting people's interpretation. I favor the 'bracers bonus works on incorporeal' argument, personally :D
Flaming weapons don't explode in a 20' radios burst of flame, call down a column of divine fire, or deal 1d8+1 fire damage as a touch attack. Yet the flaming property has Fireball, Flame Strike, or Flameblade as a prerequisite.
The spells required for creating a magic item don't have any effect on the items powers. (The exceptions being items that actually duplicate the spells, such as scrolls, wands, staves, and potions.)
Saying Bracers of Armor is a force effect because mage armor is the prerequisite spell is really no different then saying a +1 Flaming longsword should explode in a 20' radius ball of fire because it used Fireball as a prerequisite.
The Pit Fiend does have blasphemy and mass hold monster. He can spam them until the Ghaele fails a save. Then he can start spamming fireball or scorching ray. It is better for the Pit Fiend if blashphemy is failed, but it has a lower save.
edit:If it knew the ghaele was coming I don't see why it could not acquire a magic weapon. It certainly has enough treasure to say it got its hands on one.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a corporeal spellcaster tried to banish an incorporeal creature, I would rule as a GM that it only had a 50% chance of working. The caster is corporeal, and it is casting a spell at an incorporeal creature. AFAIK, that meets the criteria described under incorporeal defenses.
If both the caster and the target were corporeal, or both were incorporeal, then I'd rule it would work just fine. That makes the most sense with the least effort.
The Pit Fiend does have blasphemy and mass hold monster. He can spam them until the Ghaele fails a save. Then he can start spamming fireball or scorching ray. It is better for the Pit Fiend if blashphemy is failed, but it has a lower save.
edit:If it knew the ghaele was coming I don't see why it could not acquire a magic weapon. It certainly has enough treasure to say it got its hands on one.
Or more likely the pit fiend spams Trap the Soul with no material component to transform the ghaele into a soul gem that it can then use or barter with other devils with. Since the ghaele is an outsider, it is compelled to preform a service for the fiend when he decides to call on it. Such service could involve revealing celestial secrets to mopping the pit fiend's floor's to being the pit fiend's consort for a time.
Pit fiends are really scary.
How does it meet it? It references corporeal spells, not corporeal casters.
A corporeal and incorporeal creature casting the same spell are casting the same spell,
nothing about a spell effect changes depending on the caster unless explicitly specified, which isn't the case here.
Your reading requires conflating (in)corporeal creature with (in)corporeal spells,
which isn't in the rules, and which defies the definition of doing "the least effort".
Anyway, I already addressed your post at length which you ignored for some reason, so I'm done here.
The Pit Fiend does have blasphemy and mass hold monster. He can spam them until the Ghaele fails a save. Then he can start spamming fireball or scorching ray. It is better for the Pit Fiend if blashphemy is failed, but it has a lower save.
edit:If it knew the ghaele was coming I don't see why it could not acquire a magic weapon. It certainly has enough treasure to say it got its hands on one.
Or more likely the pit fiend spams Trap the Soul with no material component to transform the ghaele into a soul gem that it can then use or barter with other devils with. Since the ghaele is an outsider, it is compelled to preform a service for the fiend when he decides to call on it. Such service could involve revealing celestial secrets to mopping the pit fiend's floor's to being the pit fiend's consort for a time.
Pit fiends are really scary.
I did not even see Trap the Soul, and I was looking at the stat block.
:(
How does it meet it? It references corporeal spells, not corporeal casters.
A corporeal and incorporeal creature casting the same spell are casting the same spell,
nothing about a spell effect changes depending on the caster unless explicitly specified, which isn't the case here.
Your reading requires conflating (in)corporeal creature with (in)corporeal spells,
which isn't in the rules, and which defies the definition of doing "the least effort".
Anyway, I already addressed your post at length which you ignored for some reason, so I'm done here.
I don't think Nefreet is going for RAI. He is going for "ease of play" with his last post.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
AFAIK there's no game definition of "Corporeal Spell", much less a rule saying "corporeal creatures cast corporeal spells" (and incorporeal creatures cast incorporeal spells). So when we see the phrase 'corporeal spell' we are just left with the normal English meaning of 'corporeal':
Actually, just a few sentences earlier in the same paragraph, we find "Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it takes only half damage from a corporeal source (except for channel energy)."
This fairly clearly indicates than when this paragraph speaks of corporeality in terms of spells, it refers to the source of that spell (ie; the item or creature who cast the spell).
The Pit Fiend does have blasphemy and mass hold monster. He can spam them until the Ghaele fails a save. Then he can start spamming fireball or scorching ray. It is better for the Pit Fiend if blashphemy is failed, but it has a lower save.
edit:If it knew the ghaele was coming I don't see why it could not acquire a magic weapon. It certainly has enough treasure to say it got its hands on one.
Or more likely the pit fiend spams Trap the Soul with no material component to transform the ghaele into a soul gem that it can then use or barter with other devils with. Since the ghaele is an outsider, it is compelled to preform a service for the fiend when he decides to call on it. Such service could involve revealing celestial secrets to mopping the pit fiend's floor's to being the pit fiend's consort for a time.
Pit fiends are really scary.
I did not even see Trap the Soul, and I was looking at the stat block.
:(
Trap the Soul as a SLA at-will is probably the scariest ability the pit fiend has in my humble opinion. It's literally a ranged save or die of sorts that captures your soul. This means that facing a pit fiend is a thing of nightmares and terrors because you might not simply die, but your soul will be taken and you will be bartered as a currency until a fiend or "merchant" has use for you. For outsiders (including planetouched!) it is arguably worse as you can be made to preform a service similar to a planar binding but with no attempts to resist (you just have to do it, the end :P).
More insidious is that a pit fiend's lair can easily be filled with objects that will steal your soul for the pit fiend because he can make an object a trigger object (so don't touch anything in a pit fiend's dominion unless you know good and well what it is, probably with liberal amounts of detect magic, spellcraft, and knowledge arcana).
Actually, just a few sentences earlier in the same paragraph, we find "Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it takes only half damage from a corporeal source (except for channel energy)."
This fairly clearly indicates than when this paragraph speaks of corporeality in terms of spells, it refers to the source of that spell (ie; the item or creature who cast the spell).
I would read that sentence as spells or weapons being the potentially corporeal sources.
Just like a corporeal character can use corporeal weapons/spells, or incorporeal weapons/spells,an incorporeal character can use corporeal weapons/spells, or incorporeal weapons/spells.
There is no game term to over-ride that by English, Stone Call is a 'corporeal' spell effect, that Incorporeal Casters are free to cast.
Stone Call does not have different effect depending on who casts it.
The character/caster is not the source of damage, rather the source of the damage is the sword/fireball/etc.
There is no game term to over-ride that by English, Stone Call is a 'corporeal' spell effect, that Incorporeal Casters are free to cast.
Stone Call does not have different effect depending on who casts it.
The character/caster is not the source of damage, rather the source of the damage is the sword/fireball/etc.I think here we are mixing "physical" and "corporeal". A spell with a physical effect is Fireball or Stone Call; a spell with a non-physical effect is Charm Person or Oppresive Boredom. Corporeal is not the same: Corporeal is opposed by Incorporeal: unless you have the subtype and/or Extraordinary Ability of that name, you are not Incorporeal. Spells are not, per se, Corporeal or Incorporeal, the same way monsters are not, per se, "mind-affecting". As you said, there's no "game term" specifically described for being "corporeal": there's also not a flag called "corporeal" or "incorporeal" incorpored to any spell description. Adjudicating them would be extremely against the "least effort" rule and very, very in the realm of house-ruling.
What we do have is the description of the Incorporeal (Ex) ability. It starts saying that Incorporeal creatures have no physical body. If we went by the letter, ANY spell would then be Incorporeal, because magic doesn't have a physical body (well, scrolls would, wouldnt they? ^_^). What is or is not physical is the effect of the spell, but not the spell itself. And we are pretty sure there IS a distinction between spells which are and spells which aren't corporeal.
Now: we also know that incorporeal beings can affect other incorporeal beings pretty much as if both were corporeal. If a spell being corporeal or incorporeal depended on effect and not the caster, we would have incorporeal wizards casting fireballs to shadows which would do half damage to the shadows but full damage to normal people, because the spell would be corporeal. Even beyond rules interpretation, thematically, just that already sounds wrong: an incorporeal wizard should be blasting shadows with the same ease a corporeal wizards blasts armies of zombies.
With all that: given the elements we have, I think best way to proceed would be, first of all, waiting (asking) for a FAQ to clarify it for once and all. In my opinion, data suggests more non-damaging spells/effects working half of the time when coming from a corporeal caster, to pair the damaging spells doing half the damage, specially given there's an Ectoplasmic Spell Metamagic Feat that solves it all at a +1 slot level cost.
But of course, YMMV, and House Rules are there for making more personal adjudications.