coyote_blue's page

I think it would be more fun to answer the question in terms of how magic works in your game setting.

The player's opinion is based on the argument that "magic changes the world" - that is, it works as an absolute breaking of physics. On that argument, if the player could safely stand exactly at the base of the waterfall, he'd shoot up to the top, and maybe have to make an Acrobatics or Dex check to not stumble on the uneven surface when he reached the top, where the water is breaking. His argument for walking horizontally up wouldn't work very well, since the "pushed out of submersion" effect does not specifically redefine the definition of "up". If you can't walk up a wall, you can't walk up a fall.

The more interesting idea would be that "magic changes the target" - that is, magic only breaks physics locally. Using that logic, Water Walking actually changes just the caster's body, so that it has a new relationship to water. A player standing at the base of the waterfall would be pushed first to the surface of the pool, then to the surface of the fall. And he'd have to make a climb check.

This would simplify falling and attacks. He takes falling damage, and he can be attacked by creatures made of water. He'd be immune to the vortex, but maybe he'd take MORE damage from bashes and slams.

If the spell affects his gear, then he could throw a rope and hook to the top. If the GM wanted to be a jerk, the player might also be randomly be pushed to the rear side of the fall.

The way to make the ruling fair would be to decide the GM's world is one way or the other. The next time the powergamer in question is reading his spellbook for exploits, he can take that into consideration.

Personally, I like the second version better. I like a game world where a person using water breathing actually has to spend a combat round spitting up water when he gets to dry land.