| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I couldn't find an answer to these questions after a GM hit us with a Incorporeal Spell Caster we faced.
First does a incorporeal monster cast corporeal spells, or incorporeal spells?
Also how would these incorporeal monster cast spells on himself like a force spell such as shield, or stone skin?
Can they even cast spells with class levels?
To my knowladge-
They cast corporeal spells.
Spells with a target of "you" can target you anyway. (Don't think this is written down, but I think it makes sense.)
Force spells target both planes at once, as always.
Incorporeal spells should affect corporeal creatures the same way corporeal spells affect incorporeal creatures.
There shouldn't be any issue casting a spell on yourself, whether corporeal or incorporeal.
The real problem should be that without eschew materials an incorporeal creature doesn't have the material components to cast most spells.
|
Incorporeal spells should affect corporeal creatures the same way corporeal spells affect incorporeal creatures.
Nothing in the rules support that interpretation.
The real problem should be that without eschew materials an incorporeal creature doesn't have the material components to cast most spells.
An incorporeal creature's attacks pass through (ignore) natural armor, armor, and shields, although deflection bonuses and force effects (such as mage armor) work normally against it. Incorporeal creatures pass through and operate in water as easily as they do in air. Incorporeal creatures cannot fall or take falling damage. Incorporeal creatures cannot make trip or grapple attacks, nor can they be tripped or grappled. In fact, they cannot take any physical action that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions. Incorporeal creatures have no weight and do not set off traps that are triggered by weight.
The limit is about manipulating other people equipment, not about the incorporeal creature manipulating his equipment. so it is dependent on how the creature achieve incorporeality. It their form of incorporeality allow them to retain their equipment they can (probably) manipulate it.
A wizard ghost using its spell component pouch? Sure.A creature becoming gaseous? no, it don't retain its shape, so its gear is not accessible.
As, for a lot of things, it all depend on the GM interpretation of the situation.
About the OP question:
Incorporeal: Creatures with the incorporeal condition do not have a physical body. Incorporeal creatures are immune to all nonmagical attack forms. Incorporeal creatures take half damage (50%) from magic weapons, spells, spell-like effects, and supernatural effects. Incorporeal creatures take full damage from other incorporeal creatures and effects, as well as all force effects.
|
|
In the case of a ghost, it doesn't actually HAVE equipment. It's a magical extension of the ghost's own spirit. The ACTUAL equipment which they had in life is still wherever they died, and if picked up will actually take away the "echo" that the ghost was using. A rules-lawyer could make an argument against a wraith sorceror throwing a fireball because it didn't have bat guano, but at that point the GM just spontaneously gives the wraith Eschew Materials and Favored Enemy: Rules Lawyer for free.
The issue is that once upon a time incorporeal was (mostly) interchangeable with ethereal, and so logically a ghost wizard throwing a fireball was throwing that fireball on the ethereal plane and oh dear we're confused. Pathfinder made the two pretty much unrelated, but that means there is no reason for them to specify, "a ghost-wizard throwing a fireball is just like a wizard throwing a fireball." Bringing up the subject to someone without that previous edition's baggage would simply be confused.
Anyway, far as I can tell a fireball is a fireball, no such thing as an "incorporeal spell."
Actually the ghost wizard could throw the fireball on the ethereal plane or manifest and throw the fireball in the prime material plane, so he could choose what kind of spell he was casting.
The third edition did away with that distinction, not Pathfinder (from what I recall) and made several creatures incorporeal but not ethereal.
The 3.x line of games simply don't define what is an incorporeal spell, so you must use its source. And, as written, an incorporeal source generate an incorporeal spell or effect that affect normally both corporeal and incorporeal creatures.
Trying to constrain incorporeality in the old rules about etherealness will only generate problems as there are incorporeal creatures and effects that give incorporeality that work outside of those limitations.
|
I couldn't find an answer to these questions after a GM hit us with a Incorporeal Spell Caster we faced.
First does a incorporeal monster cast corporeal spells, or incorporeal spells?
Also how would these incorporeal monster cast spells on himself like a force spell such as shield, or stone skin?
Can they even cast spells with class levels?
-I would rule that the spells would be incorporeal and would have effect over both the living and the dead.
- I would allow shield but I would swap out Stone Skin for something else. Without getting too in-depth with logic.
-They should. Unless they are built otherwise.
Incorporeal Form (Sp): Once per day, an eidolon can become incorporeal for 1 round per summoner level. While in this form, the eidolon gains the incorporeal subtype and incorporeal quality. It only takes half damage from corporeal sources as long as they are magic (it takes no damage from nonmagical weapons and objects). Likewise, its spells or spell-like abilities deal only half damage to corporeal creatures. Spells and other effects that do not deal damage function normally. The summoner must be at least 15th level before selecting this evolution.
Solipsism (Ex): At 20th level, you can drift into the dream world, fading from the world around you. You can become incorporeal for 1 minute per sorcerer level. You gain the incorporeal subtype and take only half damage from corporeal magical attacks (you take no damage from nonmagical weapons and objects). Your spells deal only half damage to corporeal creatures, but spells and abilities that do not deal damage function normally. The duration need not be continuous, but it must be used in 1-minute increments.
I disagree that there is nothing in the rules to support my interpretation.
Nothing really contradictory or inconsistent. You don't need to repeat everything every time something comes up. By referring to incorporeality, they're calling attention to the status and descriptors everybody is familiar with. The added language is likely there to do one of two things, either set it off as different than normal (which is possible but I don't favor that because it doesn't really use distinguishing language like one might expect). Or two, it's there to remind people of ramifications of the ability that likely don't come up all that much when the ability or status in question is used by or applied to an NPC.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a wraith-wizard is casting "corporeal spells", what spell components are being used?
More importantly, incorporeal creatures can't cast "corporeal spells" because "Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, [an incorporeal creature] takes only half damage from a corporeal source". Yet, incorporeal creatures "can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures".
In other words, if spells cast by incorporeal creatures are "corporeal", they deal only 50% damage to incorporeal creatures. Yet we know attacks and spells from incorporeal sources deal full damage to incorporeal creatures. Besides, if there are corporeal sources, then it follows that there are incorporeal sources as well (otherwise there's no reason to discuss the source of the spell as being relevant) and the rules explicitly tell us that these situations are treated differently based upon source (they just don't fully delineate the extent to which the situations are treated differently). It stands to reason that incorporeal creatures are subject to the same restrictions that corporeal creatures are, just reversed.
If a wraith casts fireball, it ought to do the same 50% damage to the corporeal wizard that the wizard's fireball does to the wraith. In my opinion, anyway. I recognize that not everybody adopts the same position, which is fine. It's not clearly laid out in the rules. But it's not like I'm making up the interpretation whole hog, which was really the only purpose of my earlier reply.
Undoubtedly, incorporeal creatures casting spells are an incorporeal source of magic. What the ultimate impact of that is not fully explained, though. My position wasn't even informed by the two citations I provided earlier; those were just the clearest explanations without having to actually dive into all of this.
YMMV, but I can get from A to B using just the rules in the sections you're referencing without all that much effort.