How much damage vs. a single, non-magical, non-crystalline object? Like, say, a Long spear, or for that purpose, a MW Great Axe?
There's no save. Is it an insta-Sunder from afar? If not, how much damage?
Shatter
Evocation [Sonic]
Level: Brd 2, Chaos 2, Clr 2, Destruction 2, Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Area or Target: 5-ft.-radius spread; or one solid object or one crystalline creature
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates (object); Will negates (object) or Fortitude half; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes (object)
Shatter creates a loud, ringing noise that breaks brittle, nonmagical objects; sunders a single solid, nonmagical object; or damages a crystalline creature.
Used as an area attack, shatter destroys nonmagical objects of crystal, glass, ceramic, or porcelain. All such objects within a 5-foot radius of the point of origin are smashed into dozens of pieces by the spell. Objects weighing more than 1 pound per your level are not affected, but all other objects of the appropriate composition are shattered.
Alternatively, you can target shatter against a single solid object, regardless of composition, weighing up to 10 pounds per caster level. Targeted against a crystalline creature (of any weight), shatter deals 1d6 points of sonic damage per caster level (maximum 10d6), with a Fortitude save for half damage.
Arcane Material Component: A chip of mica.
I always saw it being a Distanced Sunder with a Will Negates against a single Object of 10/bs per caster level
i thought the FortSave was only against Crystal Creatures and i believe the RAW Support this interpetation
I think it would be a bit clearer if both the secondary effects (THe Single Object and the Crystellin creature) each had their own Paragraph
Then how do you determine the Will save of an object?? Is it the Will of the wielder?
Then how do you determine the Will save of an object?? Is it the Will of the wielder?
Yes. Attended objects use their own save or that of their possessor, whichever is better. Only magic items have their own saves, so non-attended non-magical items get no save. Attended non-magical items get their possessor's save. Unattended magical items get only their own save, and attended magical items get whichever is better.
The rules are on page 177 of the Player's Handbook.
Then how do you determine the Will save of an object?? Is it the Will of the wielder?
Right. A mundane object receives no saving throw if it is unattended. If it is in someone's possession (not necessarily their hands, just on them), then it gets a Will save. Magical items use either the owner's Will save or their own (2 + 1/2 caster level, rounded down), whichever is better. An intelligent magical item adds its Wisdom modifier to its own saving throw.
For reference: DMG, p 214: Damaging Magic Items
TK
Well, as a DM my life is about to be constantly 'shattered'. My lovely wife is playing a warlock who just picked up Baleful Utterance which is essentially shatter.
Until now I had no idea how powerful it can be. If I am right, she can essentially shatter any door, lock, chest, trap, weapon, armor, etc as long as it is unattended. Is that correct?
I see discussion earlier in this thread that some DMs rule magic items are not affected and some go the other way. It seems to me a very powerful thing to let the equivalent of a 2nd level spell shatter a magic item, even with a save. In this case, the warlock can use this *at will* which means that she could, given a little time, effectively shatter almost any unattended magic item.
Any suggestions for moderating this during my upcoming game play would be appreciated. *rubs temples* This just makes my head hurt.
Well, as a DM my life is about to be constantly 'shattered'. My lovely wife is playing a warlock who just picked up Baleful Utterance which is essentially shatter.
Until now I had no idea how powerful it can be. If I am right, she can essentially shatter any door, lock, chest, trap, weapon, armor, etc as long as it is unattended. Is that correct?
Keep in mind the weight limit of Shatter. I had a Warlock character with Baleful Utterance and you need to be like level 6 or 7 just to Shatter a normal door (they weight a lot in D&D). IT probably won't be too un-balancing since by the time she can do it regularlly you'll be at a high enough level that it's not much of an issue.
Keep in mind the weight limit of Shatter. I had a Warlock character with Baleful Utterance and you need to be like level 6 or 7 just to Shatter a normal door (they weight a lot in D&D). IT probably won't be too un-balancing since by the time she can do it regularlly you'll be at a high enough level that it's not much of an issue.
Right. Bear in mind the following:
Using an invocation takes a standard action. So, in combat scenarios, the warlock can essentially use it in place of sunder. Maybe it takes a round or two, just like it's likely to take with a sunder attempt, to disarm their opponent. Either way, they won't be doing much else when they try it.
At low levels, they won't be doing much more than sundering weapons, busting chests open, or crushing padlocks and chains. /Usually/ this shouldn't be a problem.
Don't let a player get away with any of that "But I'm targetting the /lock/!!" stuff when trying to open doors. If the lock doesn't come /off/ the door when it's unlocked (like a padlock), it's part of the door itself.
At higher levels, it's a better kick in the door spell, and increasingly /less/ useful for sundering weapons. It's also useful for attacking the rather rare crystalline creature (there's where your fortitude save applies).
Overall, I don't think you have much to worry about from this spell. Just stick to the RAW, and use a little common sense in adjudicating its application, it'll all work out. :)
I appreciate the feedback and look forward to more as well. For reference, the warlock in question just became 6th level. At first I thought the invisibility at will would be the problem, but I'm actually more concerned about shatter. She is a *very* creative player so I'm trying to clarify things ahead of time to keep the situation/ability fun and 'cool' but yet reigned in enough to to be overpowered.
The 'lock is part of the door' is a good point. I think I'll share that with her right now...
Heh. It goes a little further than that, too. In general, if something is part of the construction of an object - ie, a built-in lock, the bars of a jail cell, or otherwise something you don't generally /remove/ from the overall object - then it can't be targeted separately by spells that target an object. It either targets the whole object, or it doesn't work.
Aimed spells, like rays (such as the Eldritch Blast), might be another option, and with an invocation like Hammer(ing?) Blast (makes the blast do normal damage to objects), it makes the warlock's main ability a true 'kick in the door' style attack.
I'm curious about the use of shatter when used as an area effect. Say you're going through a goblin den and come into a room with several goblin defenders and some pottery (food or water storage, whatever- "primitive" societies would probably just have lots of pottery around).
So, the mage decides to use shatter on all that pottery. Assuming that the contents of the pots is innocuous, would there be any possible benefit from this? Could shattering the pots create a shrapnel blast of little ceramic shards? This seems outside the spell- I mainly see the things just cracking and falling apart. But, what about the pieces left on the ground? Could they serve as a caltrop field or something?
Shatter is a very nice spell in certain situations, and almost 100% useless in others, it seems (though this is the case for almost every spell, it seems even moreso for this one). I'm just thinking about expanded versatility here.
sunders a single solid, nonmagical object
Seems pretty straight forward to me. The only indication I can see in the spell description as you wrote it is that "damage", (hit points) is only ever done against crystiline creatures.
Could they serve as a caltrop field or something?
That might open an interesting potential for alternate use and/or abuse of the intent of the spell. If you allow it now, you'll have a difficult time disallowing it in the future (camel's nose under the tent and all that). If a broomstick gets shattered, you may be required to judge how many pieces it broke into, and to determined wheather they are considered underfoot badly enough to require checking Dexterity/Balance (whatever) to see if the character trips as a result of interacing with it. If the size, number of pieces, et al are not consequential enough to worry about, then don't. This can also be applied to pottery shards, non-magical armor, etc., etc., etc., Once it breaks, is it an impediment to anyone? Since the spell indicates a potential for increasing the amount of dross underfoot (the 1lb per level maximum limit) you might want to consider saying that no use is available for any of the broken shards below a certain poundage. If, say, you draw the line at 4 pounds, then a caster at or below 4th level would leave insufficient shards to worry about. At 5th level the pile of just now becomes pervasive enough that it can have some affect on combat maneuvers. This cutoff would be up to you, and totally arbitrary, given the lack of guidance from the book.
I would probably discuss this with the players and see what suggestions they have for a creative, but equitable solution to this problem they're willing to work with.
sunders a single solid, nonmagical object
Seems pretty straight forward to me. The only indication I can see in the spell description as you wrote it is that "damage", (hit points) is only ever done against crystiline creatures.
Could they serve as a caltrop field or something?That might open an interesting potential for alternate use and/or abuse of the intent of the spell. If you allow it now, you'll have a difficult time disallowing it in the future (camel's nose under the tent and all that). If a broomstick gets shattered, you may be required to judge how many pieces it broke into, and to determined wheather they are considered underfoot badly enough to require checking Dexterity/Balance (whatever) to see if the character trips as a result of interacing with it. If the size, number of pieces, et al are not consequential enough to worry about, then don't. This can also be applied to pottery shards, non-magical armor, etc., etc., etc., Once it breaks, is it an impediment to anyone? Since the spell indicates a potential for increasing the amount of dross underfoot (the 1lb per level maximum limit) you might want to consider saying that no use is available for any of the broken shards below a certain poundage. If, say, you draw the line at 4 pounds, then a caster at or below 4th level would leave insufficient shards to worry about. At 5th level the pile of just now becomes pervasive enough that it can have some affect on combat maneuvers. This cutoff would be up to you, and totally arbitrary, given the lack of guidance from the book.
I would probably discuss this with the players and see what suggestions they have for a creative, but equitable solution to this problem they're willing to work with.
Given the complexity you just hinted at, combined with the room for argument it would open up (again, as you pointed out), it's probably just better off to just forget about really implementing that, for simplicity's sake.
If you want to scale "shatter" down a bit vs. non-crystalline objects, you could treat it like a Strength check to break an object, but use a caster level check in place of the Str check (+10 max. bonus, as appropriate for a 2nd level spell against a single target). That way the sorcerer is back to being more or less on a par with the barbarian, opening-door-wise.
Realistically, it shouldn't do everything a "knock" spell does (also 2nd level), and then some. Regardless of the RAR, it just makes sense to limit it with respect to non-crystalline objects.
I appreciate the feedback and look forward to more as well. For reference, the warlock in question just became 6th level. At first I thought the invisibility at will would be the problem, but I'm actually more concerned about shatter. She is a *very* creative player so I'm trying to clarify things ahead of time to keep the situation/ability fun and 'cool' but yet reigned in enough to to be overpowered.
The 'lock is part of the door' is a good point. I think I'll share that with her right now...
To give you a good point of reference I caculated the weight of a solid oak door 78"x32". A one inch door would weigh 61.318 lbs. not including any hinges. In DnD this is equal to a simple wooden door. A good wooden door would be 1.5 inches. A strong wooden door would be 2 inches. (p.61 DMG)
Thank you for the weight info on the doors. That is really helpful.
I have sold my wife on the difference in doors and on locks being part of the door unless they are padlocks.
I have not been able to sell her on the example of the bars in a cell. It seems we have come to a debate of whether something affects the integrity of the overall unit. Basically she argues that bars are an individualy component.
She also has made a reference to a previous game when we played Red Hand of Doom
Though she will accept my ruling as DM, I both want to be fair and not ruin the fun.
Maybe I'm overthinking this, but she is a very creative player and I would love to head off problems before they occur.
Thank you all for the helpful advice.