I came up with this idea, but feel that it might be a little broken and don’t really want to press my luck. I want to cast silence on a tangle foot bag and throw it at spell casters. Bag explodes all over PC spell casters and is now covered in a silent goop. Is there anything in the RAW that would prevent my npc’s from doing this? Is it good form for me to pull this stunt on my players?
I came up with this idea, but feel that it might be a little broken and don’t really want to press my luck. I want to cast silence on a tangle foot bag and throw it at spell casters. Bag explodes all over PC spell casters and is now covered in a silent goop. Is there anything in the RAW that would prevent my npc’s from doing this? Is it good form for me to pull this stunt on my players?
Yup, the spell says you can cast it on a object (the bag) so this could work. If the bag is then attached to a spellcaster the effect will move around.
This is extremely good form, this shows them that you can have fun with the rules. It's just as valid as the fire trap on small containers that you can hurl at your opponents ;>
Go for it, but expect your players to come up with their own little surprises the next time you play ;>
I came up with this idea, but feel that it might be a little broken and don’t really want to press my luck. I want to cast silence on a tangle foot bag and throw it at spell casters. Bag explodes all over PC spell casters and is now covered in a silent goop. Is there anything in the RAW that would prevent my npc’s from doing this? Is it good form for me to pull this stunt on my players?
I used to have my Arcane Archer use Khelben's Suspended Silence on barbed arrows and use them as anti-spellcaster ammunition. I couldn't see where your suggestion would be anything but legal, as well as vicious and useful.
That's a pretty neat idea, and it doesn't really bend the rules. Considering the Tanglefoot bag has a range increment of 10', it'll be hard to hit a spellcaster without moving up to very close range.
Of course, if you succeed, the caster can be rendered pretty helpless. I don't know if I would use it. After all, the real strength of your use of the Silence Spell is that it can circumvent the Will Save when cast on a person. A stationary Silence spell is cool, but a spell that moves with a spellcaster is pretty rough without giving the poor guy a chance to save.
Also, a tanglefoot bag is considered an Object, but does that Object still exist after it's used? An example would be casting a silence spell on a piece of ice. . . if the ice melts and soaks into someone's clothing, does that mean the spell is still intact on every drop of water?
I'm not trying to rip on your idea. I still thnk it's cool. . . what I would do to cahnge it is allow the caster a Will Save, OR make the spell stationary wherever the tangefoot bag lands. If the caster's reflex save fails, then he's stuck there anyway. If he's free, he's still at half movement in the zone of a silence spell.
That's a great idea...imaginative and innovative.
However, as a DM, I would take issue with the area of effect of the Silence spell being "stuck" to a target via the Tanglefoot bag splooge... Since the area of effect of a Silence spell is centered at a point (the bag), when the bag explodes, where does that point go?
All over the area of effect? Have you expanded the area of effect of the Silence spell by increasing its "center" into an area in itself? No.
A nasty DM could claim that the Silence is dispelled, from the removal of it's centered object...the bag. I would say that the Silence will be centered at the point where the bag last was, that being it's point of detonation. As mentioned already, any targets would be either stuck or slowed within the overlapping areas of effect of both the bag and the Silence.
But I would draw the line at allowing the spell's center to be 'attached' to a target by this means; I would require the centered object to remain intact and on the person of the target - like an arrow, dart, bolt or other missile.
M
That's a great idea...imaginative and innovative.
However, as a DM, I would take issue with the area of effect of the Silence spell being "stuck" to a target via the Tanglefoot bag splooge... Since the area of effect of a Silence spell is centered at a point (the bag), when the bag explodes, where does that point go?
All over the area of effect? Have you expanded the area of effect of the Silence spell by increasing its "center" into an area in itself? No.
A nasty DM could claim that the Silence is dispelled, from the removal of it's centered object...the bag. I would say that the Silence will be centered at the point where the bag last was, that being it's point of detonation. As mentioned already, any targets would be either stuck or slowed within the overlapping areas of effect of both the bag and the Silence.
But I would draw the line at allowing the spell's center to be 'attached' to a target by this means; I would require the centered object to remain intact and on the person of the target - like an arrow, dart, bolt or other missile.
M
I like this idea. How about this: if a silence spell is cast on a tangle foot bag and then thrown at a target, the spell is dispelled (the bag is destroyed). But for sale at your local supply store is the new and improved silent tangle foot bag. There are two versions.
1. This is a specially made tangle foot bag that when you cast silence on it, it centers the spell on where the bag hits (and is destroyed).2. Same as 1 but it come all ready with the silence spell cast on it. The silence comes into effect upon the hit (and destruction) of the bag.
Now how much would these new tangle foot bags cost and what skills/feats would one need to create them.
Also this idea came to me. The spell says that you can cast the spell on a small stone. Well, what if that small stone is glued to the outside of a regular tangle foot bag. This once more seems to be a loop hole around having a target get a save agents the spell. How would you rule if one of your players used any of these tactics. How would you feel if your DM used them agents you’re PC?
I like this idea. How about this: if a silence spell is cast on a tangle foot bag and then thrown at a target, the spell is dispelled (the bag is destroyed). But for sale at your local supply store is the new and improved silent tangle foot bag. There are two versions.
1. This is a specially made tangle foot bag that when you cast silence on it, it centers the spell on where the bag hits (and is destroyed).
2. Same as 1 but it come all ready with the silence spell cast on it. The silence comes into effect upon the hit (and destruction) of the bag.
Now how much would these new tangle foot bags cost and what skills/feats would one need to create them.Also this idea came to me. The spell says that you can cast the spell on a small stone. Well, what if that small stone is glued to the outside of a regular tangle foot bag. This once more seems to be a loop hole around having a target get a save agents the spell. How would you...
Logistically, this is the simplest way to create the original intended effect:
- cast Silence on a small stone;
- put the stone into the Tanglefoot Bag;
No modifying the bag, no extra spells, no extra cost.
- When the bag is thrown and detonates, the stone will remain where the bag landed, OR...
(interesting DM angle)
...the stone might be ejected from the detonation in a random direction (grenade scatter table), making a ranged touch attack on any target in that direction to adhere to the target - optional Reflex save to avoid the stone, optional Spellcraft check to realize that the stone is the center of the Silence spell, then allowing standard Tanglefoot Bag chances to remove the stone from his person.
*brain rolling with this now*
M
I wouldn't rule that disassembly of the initial target disrupted the spell. There's nothing in the spell's description that implies the target maintian cohesiveness for the full duration of the spell. Imagine if you were to target a person with a radius spell like darkness or silence and your friendly party barbarian got off a critical hit with his trusty battle axe and wound up cutting off one of the silent target's limbs (or even cleaving the target in twain), would you imagine sound would immediatly return to the area such that the barbarian's yawp would suddenly be audilble? Barring complete disintergration of the initial target, I would rule that it's still in effect and follows the path of the initial target, pieces or whole. I would be specific in asking the caster of the spell what his/her specific target was, but if I were told as DM that one of the clerics in the party cast silence on a limb that was whole at the time of casting, then broken into two pieces, I would allow them to throw the two smaller pieces each with half of the original magical effect (just to keep some sembelence of balance for a 2nd level spell).
My 17th-level PCs used exactly that trick to take out a lich once. As the DM, I was both impressed and annoyed. :-D
-Amber S.
The way I saw tanglefoot bags was the bag itself didn't actualy EXPLODE, instead the target get hits with a bag full of sticky gunk which glorps out of the bag's hole, leaving the target covered in gue with a bag stuck to him somewhere.
The only problem I see at all with this idea is the person holding the bag with silence cast on it. Is there something I'm not getting or would that person be in the area of silence until the bag was thrown? This might not be a problem for the party rogue or fighter in the midle of combat, but what about walking arround town or setting down at the tavern for a pint after an adventure? If there was a way to suppress the area of effect until the bag was thrown it would be a great idea for a party member to cary two to three of these arround with them, otherwise it is only applicable by casting silence on a bag and throwing it durring combat, which might and might not be a tactily good idea.
I think everyone who has posted so far have come up with some very interesting ideas and points of order. The stone in the bag is a great idea, as is the magical tangelfoot bag of silence, but I think creatures would still get Will saving throws to avoid the silence (otherwise, it would be just too good).
|
I've been having this same situation in my campaign, with my players.
They've been using arrows with silence, which has been noted, obviates the need for a Will save, not to mention the object (the arrow) is destroyed on impact, which is a problem.
What I've ruled is an object destroyed nullifies the silence spell -- however, I like the tanglefoot bag idea! I think some enterprising monsters will have to try this. I'd rule once the goo is gone (via damage, Str check, or 2d4 rounds), the silence goes away...
I'm not sure the arrow being destroyed is a problem... it's not so much destroyed as rendered useless... just because the arrow may be broken, blunted, or otherwise useless as an arrow doesn't mean the remains of the arrow aren't still the target of the silence spell. I would rule that the silence remains targeted on the largest remaining piece of the bag/arrow, rather than on all remnants.
But that's me.
- Ashavan
I'm not sure the arrow being destroyed is a problem... it's not so much destroyed as rendered useless... just because the arrow may be broken, blunted, or otherwise useless as an arrow doesn't mean the remains of the arrow aren't still the target of the silence spell. I would rule that the silence remains targeted on the largest remaining piece of the bag/arrow, rather than on all remnants.
But that's me.
- Ashavan
That's how I ruled it (as did the DM of the campaign I was playing in at the time) as well. The target was the arrow. When fired, it stuck into a creature/person/object and did not poof out of existence or disintegrate. Thus my earlier post about targeting a barbed arrow, which would do additional damage and require at least a round to remove and discard. I also had to track missed arrows that had silence attached to them as well as they radiated silence wherever they hit.
Fo me, the arrow idea is the same as the tanglefoot bag. It's unbalanced because the intended target doesn't get a Wil save, and the arrow, goop, or watever can move with the target. Spellcasters (obvious targets) have very good will saves, and I think they should get a chance to use them, whether they''re PCs or bad guys. If they can't make a will save, then they should be able to get away.
Jost Wrote:
"I wouldn't rule that disassembly of the initial target disrupted the spell. There's nothing in the spell's description that implies the target maintian cohesiveness for the full duration of the spell."
This is absoultely true, but as a DM, I'd rule that the object breaks apart anyway. IMHO, there is a substantial difference between semantics and spirit, and I usually try to go with the spirit of the spells. If you start down this road, every single combat with a Wizard will involve the same set of tactics, thus limiting the options for everyone involved. . . i.e. Every Wizard faced now has a metamagic rod, they all have to waste a feat on Silent Spell and prepare their spells accordingly, and so on. I think allowing any tactic that is overpoered prevents all of the balanced variety of options for your characters and foes down the road, and it forces them to pigionhole themselves and their tactics.
Granted, this can be fun in a Player vs. DM in a chess-match/battle-of-with sort of way. i can seet that, i guess. . . but we don't usually play that way. Just my humble thoughts.
Fo me, the arrow idea is the same as the tanglefoot bag. It's unbalanced because the intended target doesn't get a Wil save, and the arrow, goop, or watever can move with the target. Spellcasters (obvious targets) have very good will saves, and I think they should get a chance to use them, whether they''re PCs or bad guys. If they can't make a will save, then they should be able to get away.
I wouldn't necessarily give them automatic will saves, since the target of the spell clearly states either an object or a person. Targeting a person, yes, obviously, but a target that is affected by a spell is affected regardless of the surrounding characters' will (or other) saves. It the same logic behind this past month's Dungeon AoW module where the Tieflings target a coin with their darkness spell and toss it toward the PC party. I wouldn't classify it as unbalanced nor abuse of the rules, merely a viable strategy that isn't simply brute force but finesse and guile.
I wouldn't necessarily give them automatic will saves, since the target of the spell clearly states either an object or a person. Targeting a person, yes, obviously, but a target that is affected by a spell is affected regardless of the surrounding characters' will (or other) saves. It the same logic behind this past month's Dungeon AoW module where the Tieflings target a coin with their darkness spell and toss it toward the PC party. I wouldn't classify it as unbalanced nor abuse of the rules, merely a viable strategy that isn't simply brute force but finesse and guile.Fo me, the arrow idea is the same as the tanglefoot bag. It's unbalanced because the intended target doesn't get a Wil save, and the arrow, goop, or watever can move with the target. Spellcasters (obvious targets) have very good will saves, and I think they should get a chance to use them, whether they''re PCs or bad guys. If they can't make a will save, then they should be able to get away.
Good point there. . . however, I still think It's different. . . for two reasons:
1. tossing a coin has a limited range.
2. the PCs CAN move away from the coin if they wish.
I came up with this idea, but feel that it might be a little broken and don’t really want to press my luck. I want to cast silence on a tangle foot bag and throw it at spell casters. Bag explodes all over PC spell casters and is now covered in a silent goop. Is there anything in the RAW that would prevent my npc’s from doing this? Is it good form for me to pull this stunt on my players?
Go for it. Here's a nastier one our DM cooked up: An NPC armed with a bola made from stones taken from some of the dead magic zones created after the Time of Troubles.... coated in Sovereign Glue. PC target got wrapped up in the thing, couldn't get it off, and every magical item person is wearing goes dormant, not to mention no spell casting. We survived. So will your players. Have fun!